[Footnote 1: It should be mentioned that we have discovered a few errors in these tables. Some of these were made in compiling them from the records, and were evidently due to the assistant's difficulty of reading a strange handwriting. Other errors have been found in the records themselves. Each of the stimulus words _butter_, _tobacco_ and _king_ appears from the tables to have been repeated by a subject as a reaction; such a reaction, had it occurred, would not have been accepted, and it is plain that the experimenter wrote the stimulus word in the space where the reaction word should have been written. Still other errors were due to the experimenter's failure to speak with sufficient distinctness when reading off the stimulus words; thus, the reaction _barks_ in response to _dark_ indicates that the stimulus word was probably understood as _dog_; and the reactions _blue_ and _color_ in response to _bread_ indicate that the stimulus word was understood as _red_.] The total number of different words elicited in response to any stimulus word is limited, varying from two hundred and eighty words in response to _anger_ to seventy-two words in response to _needle_. Furthermore, for the great majority of subjects the limits are still narrower; to take a striking instance, in response to _dark_ eight hundred subjects gave one or another of the following seven words: _light, night, black, color, room, bright, gloomy;_ while only two hundred gave reactions other than these words; and only seventy subjects, out of the total number of one thousand, gave reactions which were not given by any other subject. If any record obtained by this method be examined by referring to the frequency tables, the reactions contained in it will fall into two classes: the _common_ reactions, those which are to be found in the tables, and the _individual_ reactions, those which are not to be found in the tables. For the sake of accuracy, any reaction word which is not found in the table in its identical form, but which is a grammatical variant of a word found there, may be classed as _doubtful_. The value of any reaction may be expressed by the figure representing the percentage of subjects who gave it. Thus the reaction, _table--chair_, which was given by two hundred and sixty-seven out of the total of our one thousand subjects, possesses a value of 26.7 per cent. The significance of this value from the clinical standpoint will be discussed later. § 4. NORMAL ASSOCIATIONAL TENDENCIES The normal subjects gave, on the average. 6.8 per cent of individual reactions, 1.5 per cent of doubtful ones, and 91.7 cent of common ones. The range of variation was rather wide, a considerable number of subjects giving no individual reactions at all, while a few gave over 30 per cent.[1]