each setting, since the reader by carefully scanning the columns of data
in table 5 may observe for himself the various tendencies and their
mutual relations.

Sobke's curve of learning (figure 19) in problem 2, is extremely
irregular, as was that of Skirrl. Similar irregularities appear in the
daily ratios of right to wrong first choices presented in the last
column of table 5. Most of these irregularities were due, I have
discovered, to unfavorable external conditions. Thus, dark rainy days
and disturbing noises outside the laboratory were obviously conditions
of poor work.

On the day following the final and correct series for problem 2, a
control series was given. In this Sobke seemed greatly surprised by the
new situations which presented themselves. Repeatedly he exhibited
impulses to enter the box which would have been the correct one in the
regular series of settings. He frequently inhibited such impulses and
chose correctly, but at other times he reacted quickly and made
mistakes. It was evident from his behavior that he was not guided by
anything like a definite idea of the relation of the right box to the
other members of the group.

In a second control series given on the following day, June 12,
confusion appeared, but less markedly. For the first setting, a correct
choice was made with deliberation. For the second setting, box 3 was
immediately chosen, as should have been the case in the regular series
of settings. Sobke seemed confused when he emerged from this box and had
difficulty in locating the right one. Then followed direct correct
choices for settings 3, 4, and 5. For setting 6, there is recorded a
deliberately made wrong choice, and so on throughout the series, the