Harvard Psychological Studies, Volume 2

by Unknown

Spatial: J. felt he took in all groups at once. Each unit seemed like a rich experience in itself, but he could not detect any rhythm in it, nor in the whole series. The pleasure consisted in getting a number of similar objects in the field at once, and enjoying the combination of them all, feeling that they stretched away in each direction. H. and U. grouped several unit-groups into a larger unity and enjoyed the cluster as a whole. They did not group them in any particular system, nor could they detect the slightest pleasure in moving from one such group to the next. One found his enjoyment solely in the contrast effects in each, while the other laid it to the space relations of each independently. The pleasure only came when each group of groups was spread before him. Those outside the immediate field meant nothing to him, and the movement between them had absolutely no conscious interest for him. S. said that enjoyment stopped altogether during motion of any kind, and the experience was pleasant only during total repose, on whatever happened to be in his field at once.

With the temporal type came a marked difference in apperception.

B. affirmed the pleasure to consist in going from one cluster to another, and to begin just at the point where he meets the next stimulation and feels it is going to be the same as the one previous. It is the expectation, rather than the verification recurring at intervals, which makes up the pleasure; not the actual movement, or subsequent contemplation of a group. The pleasure came in pulses; in knowing by seeing from the side of the eyes that the experience is to be repeated, and on reaching the edge of a new group, in the feeling that the experience is just about to begin.

R. felt that she "wriggled around" in each group of lines, and that a certain feeling came from "wriggling" among the lines in a particular fashion.

The pleasure consisted in having this feeling recur at regular intervals. The repetitions inside the group and of the group as a whole differed in this respect: For the separate unit-group, it apparently consisted in repeated short irregular movements, back and forth, enough to bring about a certain feeling which seemed pleasant and sufficient unto itself. Repetition of the groups as a whole meant movement across the field in one direction, for the purpose of meeting another group, and getting the required feeling from it again. The pleasure was not in the movement or in any repose (she could detect no repose at all), but in experiencing the group again, feeling that it had been so before, and would be again.

L. (the most extreme of the temporal type) agreed with R. that the lines inside the group were perceived and enjoyed temporally, as well as the groups as a whole. There was no experiencing the groups at once. He felt that he moved regularly across the field encountering five lines, one after the other, then an empty space, then five lines more. The only meaning which the group as such had for him was the five accents which came near one another in time. He could feel no unity whatever apart from this. He was even certain that his pleasure would be identical if in some mechanical way the same figure could be pushed forward, so that the same amount of time and movement would be necessary to reach it that was required to move from one figure to the next on the field. The experience was in every way analogous to auditory rhythm with him, and he was unable to express himself in other than temporal terms. Immediate perception, repose on the object, or groupings, had no significance for him.

The other two subjects were links between the extremes already described. They could feel each group, and sometimes even the whole series at once apparently, and yet were all the time conscious of a certain rhythm in going from one to the next. The whole experience seemed immediate at first, but on reflection a certain alternate rhythm was felt to be present, which was too rapid to take any considerable time, but yet had to be included as a factor in the experience. These introspections I believe to throw light on the nature of the whole experience of repetition. Since there are two methods of apperception so extreme, but moreover certain subjects partake of the characteristics of both, it might seem that both types represent but one side of the experience. Since both are enjoying the same objective series, but in their description of their feeling in face of it emphasize such different sides (leaving at the same time the other side unaccounted for), and since certain subjects share the experience of both, it might be that the sum of both methods of apperception was necessary to the fullest appreciation of the repetition in question, only in certain subjects one aspect of it was so much stronger that the other possible factors in the experience were overlooked.

It would tend to bear out this view, that when it was suggested to those of the temporal type (always excepting L.) that according to their description the other groups remaining in the field, after having performed their part in a temporal series, ought to have no further influence in the repetition, whereas they did in reality, they admitted the fact, but could not account for it. Moreover, those of the spatial type admitted that their enjoyment in having spaces equal, and in having repeated objects exactly like one another, had a certain character which no other experience possessed. This did not seem accounted for by any description they could give of its effect on them, although they could not detect what this other elusive factor might be.