[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.[10] Estel in Wundt's Philosophische Studien, II.50.Mehner, ibid.II.571.In Dietze's experiments even numbers of strokes were better caught than odd ones, by the ear.The rapidity of their sequence had a great influence on the result.At more than 4 seconds apart it was impossible to perceive series of them as units in all (cf.Wundt, Physiol.Psych., II.214).They were simply counted as so many individual strokes.Below 0.21 to 0.11 second, according to the observer, judgment again became confused.It was found that the rate of succession most favorable for grasping long series was when the strokes were sounded at intervals of from 0.3" to 0.18" apart.Series of 4, 6, 8, 16 were more easily identified than series of 10, 12, 14, 18.The latter could hardly be clearly grasped at all.Among odd numbers, 3, 5, 7 were the series easiest caught ; next, 9, 15; hardest of all, 11 and 13; and 17 was impossible to apprehend.[11] The exact interval of the sparks was 0.00205".The doubleness of their snap was usually replaced by a single-seeming sound when it fell to 0.00198", the sound becoming louder when the sparks seemed simultaneous.The difference between these two intervals is only 7/100000 of a second; and, as Exner remarks, our ear and brain must be wonderfully efficient organs to get distinct feelings from so slight an objective difference as this.See Pflüger's Archiv, Bd.XI.Get any book for free on: www.Abika.comTHE PRINCIPLES OF PSYCHOLOGY413[12] Ibid.p.407.When the sparks fell so close together that their irradiation-circles overlapped, they appeared like one spark moving from the position of the first to that of the second; and they might then follow each other as close as 0.015" without the direction of the movement ceasing to be clear.When one spark fell on the centre, the other on the margin, of the retina, the time-interval for successive apprehension had to be raised to 0.076".[13] Hall and Jastrow: Studies of Rhythm.Mind, XI.58.[14] Nevertheless, multitudinous impressions may be felt as discontinuous, though separated by excessively minute intervals of time.Grünhagen says (Pflüger's Archiv, VI.175) that 10,000electric shocks a second are felt as interrupted, by the tongue (!).Von Wittich ( ibid.II.329), that between 1000 and 2000 strokes a second are felt as discrete by the finger.W.Preyer, on the other hand (Die Grenzen des Empfindungsvermögens, etc., 1868, p.15), makes contacts appear continuous to the finger when 36.8 of them follow in a second.Similarly, Mach (Wiener Sitzgsb., LI.2, 142) gives about 36.Lalanne (Comptes Rendus, LXXXII.p.1314) found summation of finger-contacts after 22 repetitions in a second.Such discrepant figures are of doubtful worth.On the retina 20 to 30 impressions a second at the very utmost can be felt as discrete when they fall on the same spot.The ear, which begins to fuse stimuli together into a musical tone when they follow at the rate of a little over 30 a second, can still feel 132 of them a second as discontinuous when they take the shape of 'beats' (Helmholtz, Tonempfindungen, 3d ed.p.270).[15] Pflüger's Archiv, XI.428.Also in Herrmann's Hdbh.d.Physiol., 2 Bd., I.Thl.pp.260-262.[16] Pflüger's Archiv, VII.639.Tigerstedt (Bihang till Kongl.Svenska Vetenskaps-Akad.Handl., Bd.8, Häfte 2, Stockholm, 1884) revises Exner's figures, and shows that his conclusions are exaggerated.According to Tigerstedt, two observers almost always rightly appreciated 0.05"or 0.06" of reaction-time difference.Half the time they did it rightly when the difference sank to 0.03", though from 0.03" and 0.06" differences were often not noticed at all.Buccola found (Le Legge del Tempo nei Fenomeni del Pensiero, Milano, 1883, p.371) that, after much practice in making rapid reactions upon a signal, he estimated directly, in figures, his own reaction-time, in 10 experiments, with an error of from 0.010" to 0.018"; in 6, with one of 0.005" to 0.009"; in one, with one of 0.002"; and in 3, with one of 0.003".[17] "Mind, XI.61 (1886).[18] Mach, Wiener Sitzungsb., LI.2.133 (1865); Estel, loc.cit.p.65; Mehner, loc.cit.p.586; Buccola, op.cit.p 378.Fechner labors to prove that his law is only overlaid by other interfering laws in the figures recorded by these experimenters; but his case seems to me to be one of desperate infatuation with a hobby.(See Wundt's Philosophische Studien, III.1.)[19] Curious discrepancies exist between the German and the American observers with respect to the direction of the error below and above the point of indifference -- differences perhaps due to the fatigue involved in the American method.The Germans lengthened intervals below it and shortened those above.With seven Americans experimented on by Stevens this was exactly reversed.The German method was to passively listen to the intervals, then judge; the American Get any book for free on: www.Abika.comTHE PRINCIPLES OF PSYCHOLOGY414was to reproduce them actively by movements of the hand.In Mehner's experiments there was found a second indifference-point at about 5 seconds, beyond which times were judged again too long.Glass, whose work on the subject is the latest (Philos.Studien, IV.423), found (when corrections were allowed for) that all times except 0.8 sec.were estimated too short.He found a series of points of greatest relative accuracy (viz., at 1.5, 2.5, 3.75, 5, 6.25, etc., seconds respectively[)], and ([ sic] thought that his observations roughly corroborated Weber's law.As'maximum' and 'minimum' are printed interchangeably in Glass's article it is hard to follow.[20] With Vierordt and his pupils the indifference point lay as high as from 1.5 sec.to 4.9 sec., according to the observer (cf.Der Zeitsinn, 1868, p.112).In most of these experiments the time heard was actively reproduced, after a short pause, by movements of the hand, which were recorded [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
zanotowane.pl doc.pisz.pl pdf.pisz.pl trzylatki.xlx.pl
.[10] Estel in Wundt's Philosophische Studien, II.50.Mehner, ibid.II.571.In Dietze's experiments even numbers of strokes were better caught than odd ones, by the ear.The rapidity of their sequence had a great influence on the result.At more than 4 seconds apart it was impossible to perceive series of them as units in all (cf.Wundt, Physiol.Psych., II.214).They were simply counted as so many individual strokes.Below 0.21 to 0.11 second, according to the observer, judgment again became confused.It was found that the rate of succession most favorable for grasping long series was when the strokes were sounded at intervals of from 0.3" to 0.18" apart.Series of 4, 6, 8, 16 were more easily identified than series of 10, 12, 14, 18.The latter could hardly be clearly grasped at all.Among odd numbers, 3, 5, 7 were the series easiest caught ; next, 9, 15; hardest of all, 11 and 13; and 17 was impossible to apprehend.[11] The exact interval of the sparks was 0.00205".The doubleness of their snap was usually replaced by a single-seeming sound when it fell to 0.00198", the sound becoming louder when the sparks seemed simultaneous.The difference between these two intervals is only 7/100000 of a second; and, as Exner remarks, our ear and brain must be wonderfully efficient organs to get distinct feelings from so slight an objective difference as this.See Pflüger's Archiv, Bd.XI.Get any book for free on: www.Abika.comTHE PRINCIPLES OF PSYCHOLOGY413[12] Ibid.p.407.When the sparks fell so close together that their irradiation-circles overlapped, they appeared like one spark moving from the position of the first to that of the second; and they might then follow each other as close as 0.015" without the direction of the movement ceasing to be clear.When one spark fell on the centre, the other on the margin, of the retina, the time-interval for successive apprehension had to be raised to 0.076".[13] Hall and Jastrow: Studies of Rhythm.Mind, XI.58.[14] Nevertheless, multitudinous impressions may be felt as discontinuous, though separated by excessively minute intervals of time.Grünhagen says (Pflüger's Archiv, VI.175) that 10,000electric shocks a second are felt as interrupted, by the tongue (!).Von Wittich ( ibid.II.329), that between 1000 and 2000 strokes a second are felt as discrete by the finger.W.Preyer, on the other hand (Die Grenzen des Empfindungsvermögens, etc., 1868, p.15), makes contacts appear continuous to the finger when 36.8 of them follow in a second.Similarly, Mach (Wiener Sitzgsb., LI.2, 142) gives about 36.Lalanne (Comptes Rendus, LXXXII.p.1314) found summation of finger-contacts after 22 repetitions in a second.Such discrepant figures are of doubtful worth.On the retina 20 to 30 impressions a second at the very utmost can be felt as discrete when they fall on the same spot.The ear, which begins to fuse stimuli together into a musical tone when they follow at the rate of a little over 30 a second, can still feel 132 of them a second as discontinuous when they take the shape of 'beats' (Helmholtz, Tonempfindungen, 3d ed.p.270).[15] Pflüger's Archiv, XI.428.Also in Herrmann's Hdbh.d.Physiol., 2 Bd., I.Thl.pp.260-262.[16] Pflüger's Archiv, VII.639.Tigerstedt (Bihang till Kongl.Svenska Vetenskaps-Akad.Handl., Bd.8, Häfte 2, Stockholm, 1884) revises Exner's figures, and shows that his conclusions are exaggerated.According to Tigerstedt, two observers almost always rightly appreciated 0.05"or 0.06" of reaction-time difference.Half the time they did it rightly when the difference sank to 0.03", though from 0.03" and 0.06" differences were often not noticed at all.Buccola found (Le Legge del Tempo nei Fenomeni del Pensiero, Milano, 1883, p.371) that, after much practice in making rapid reactions upon a signal, he estimated directly, in figures, his own reaction-time, in 10 experiments, with an error of from 0.010" to 0.018"; in 6, with one of 0.005" to 0.009"; in one, with one of 0.002"; and in 3, with one of 0.003".[17] "Mind, XI.61 (1886).[18] Mach, Wiener Sitzungsb., LI.2.133 (1865); Estel, loc.cit.p.65; Mehner, loc.cit.p.586; Buccola, op.cit.p 378.Fechner labors to prove that his law is only overlaid by other interfering laws in the figures recorded by these experimenters; but his case seems to me to be one of desperate infatuation with a hobby.(See Wundt's Philosophische Studien, III.1.)[19] Curious discrepancies exist between the German and the American observers with respect to the direction of the error below and above the point of indifference -- differences perhaps due to the fatigue involved in the American method.The Germans lengthened intervals below it and shortened those above.With seven Americans experimented on by Stevens this was exactly reversed.The German method was to passively listen to the intervals, then judge; the American Get any book for free on: www.Abika.comTHE PRINCIPLES OF PSYCHOLOGY414was to reproduce them actively by movements of the hand.In Mehner's experiments there was found a second indifference-point at about 5 seconds, beyond which times were judged again too long.Glass, whose work on the subject is the latest (Philos.Studien, IV.423), found (when corrections were allowed for) that all times except 0.8 sec.were estimated too short.He found a series of points of greatest relative accuracy (viz., at 1.5, 2.5, 3.75, 5, 6.25, etc., seconds respectively[)], and ([ sic] thought that his observations roughly corroborated Weber's law.As'maximum' and 'minimum' are printed interchangeably in Glass's article it is hard to follow.[20] With Vierordt and his pupils the indifference point lay as high as from 1.5 sec.to 4.9 sec., according to the observer (cf.Der Zeitsinn, 1868, p.112).In most of these experiments the time heard was actively reproduced, after a short pause, by movements of the hand, which were recorded [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]