Turning to the results in Table VI, A, we find the following: (1) The influence of the pressure-kinæsthetic complex practically does not appear; while the space-error shows a marked tendency that, for the two observers, is in opposite directions. (2) On the other hand, the notes of one observer show that in his case at least the face value of the table is erroneous. To this effect he says in substance that he can make a more accurate estimate of the number in the group touched. He tries to ignore these sensations of touch, but with ill success in the case of the left hand, where clumsiness not only makes it difficult to touch the balls gently but also to keep them under the fingers, which often feel the ground-space. For this cause the group seems small in number. Clearly enough, then, it is the space-error that tells the story of the effect of the added stimuli on this observer, only it must not be interpreted as space-error. The pressure functioned in the judgment through its numerical aspect. But the positive effect with the right hand was turned to a negative with the left through its emphasis of vacancies. The high difference-value in the space-column becomes thus a striking evidence of the effect of pressure, and the results are accounted for without reference to the kinæsthetic factor. The other observer felt that the active pressure was relatively indifferent. (3) The entire absence of correct judgments on the objectively equal groups shows to what a surprising extent other factors have modified the numerical.

2. The Influence of Unevenness in Active Pressure-Feeling.

In the experiments of this section the groups differed in this way, that one rested on the smooth table-top while the other had for its bottom a coarse wire mesh covered with black cloth. The balls of the one rolled smoothly beneath the fingers while the other balls moved lumpily over their mesh. Both hands were used—each for the group on its side; and the method of observation and length of exposure agreed with those conditions in the preceding section, except that the balls were rolled a little more vigorously that the factor studied might come clearly into consciousness. The groups were interchanged for half the number of series. This could not of course completely eliminate the space-error, since kinæsthetic differences in the limbs remained uncompensated. In general the criticism in the preceding section is again applicable.

The results appear in Table VI, B. (1) One observer shows a tendency to favor the smoothly rolling group, while the other again shows no tendency. Both have large space-errors of the same character as in A of this table. (2) The introspection of the observer showing no tendency is to the effect that touch plays little or no conscious part in the situation. The other's notes give no hint that the factor studied here was influential; but to the effect on the judgment of touch in general, especially with the right hand, they give clear witness. The touch-sensations, he says, were difficult to ignore. Those from the right hand were more vivid than those from the left; and the right hand seemed more sensitive. Judgment was based on a general feeling of "moreishness" which came promptly. There is nothing to contradict the evidence of the earlier experiments that touch is again influential through its numerical character. (3) Both observers regard factors of distribution as of fundamental importance, though one was inclined at first to insist that there was nothing but number in his judgment. The significance of this unanalyzed feeling will appear in a later section. (4) These results agree with the preceding in the approximate exclusion of correct judgments.

3. The Influence of Active Weight.

The variation here in question consisted in lifting one of the groups during judgment of the relative number in the two groups. The apparatus was made by transforming into trays the frames containing the balls, by putting into these frames wire-mesh bottoms covered with black cloth. They were set each upon four small wooden pillars so that the hand could be easily thrust under the tray. At the signal a given tray was several times raised a little way and lowered, and the judgment formed on the same factor as before. Here again the space-error was not entirely eliminated. Each hand was used with the group on its side, but kinæsthetic differences peculiar to each of the limbs remained. There was always some motion among the balls in the lifted tray, though the gentleness of the lifting prevented the existence of much. This is a radical defect, but one not easily avoided with maintenance of other desirable conditions. Even more serious, as the issue proved, was the failure to control the lifting impulse; yet, as it happens, we are not prevented from getting an experimental answer to our question.

The results are recorded in Table VI, C. (1) They show no apparent effect of the weight, and with one observer the further unusual fact of no space-error. This error is marked enough in the case of the other, and, conforming in direction to that of the preceding sections of this table, allows us in so far to adopt the same interpretation of his results. (2) The introspection of one observer was to the effect that he felt a tendency toward a modification of the number-judgment by weight. It was especially strong when the group was lighter or heavier than was anticipated, the light group seeming less numerous, and the heavy group more. Occasionally he caught himself weighing the second group mentally; and sometimes he had to recover himself from a tendency to make judgments on a wrong basis, presumably that of mere weight. With such a conflict of tendencies the character of the results is not surprising. Particularly important are the opposing tendencies lying in the factor of weight itself. The other observer reported that a very heavy weight exerted an influence that it was hard but not impossible to ignore, while a lighter weight did not effectively enter the situation at all. His earlier inclination to say that there was nothing but number in his judgment inclines one to believe that fusion of factors may have passed beyond the stage of ready analysis. (3) Our analysis has given us reason to believe that active weight has a definite tendency to modify the judgment of relative number.

4. The Influence of Muscular Strain in Observation.

The study was made from the point of view of more than one set of experimental conditions, viz.:

(1) Equal strain (minimum).
(a) Right—left.
(b) Up—down.
(2) Equal strain (maximum) eyes turned.
(3) Strain vs. ease.
(a) Head and eyes turned.
(b) Eyes turned.