Animal intelligence: Experimental studiesThorndike, Edward L. (Edward Lee)
Science
Animal intelligence: Experimental studies
Thorndike, Edward L. (Edward Lee)
Animal intelligence; Psychology, Comparative
The general manner of making these experiments was like that in the case
of the cats and dogs, save that the monkey’s paw was used to open the
box from the outside instead of from the inside, and that the monkeys
were also put through the acts necessary to operate some of the chute
mechanisms. Tests parallel to that of comparing the behavior of kittens
who had themselves gone into boxes with those who were dropped in by me
were made in the following manner. I would carry a monkey from his cage
and put him in some conspicuous place (_e.g._ on the top of a chair)
and then give him a bit of food. This I would repeat a number of times.
Then I would turn him loose in the room to see whether he had acquired
an idea of being on the chair which would lead him to himself go to the
chair. I would, in order to tell whether his act, in case he did so, was
the result of random activities or was really due to his tuition, leave
him alone for 5 or 10 minutes before the tuition. If he got on the chair
afterwards when he had not before, or got on it much sooner, it would
tend to show that the idea of getting food on that chair was present and
effective. We may call these last the ‘on chair’ type of experiments.
A sample experiment with a box is the following:—
On January 4, 1901, box Delta (push back) was put in No. 1’s cage. He
failed in 5, though he was active in trying to get in for about 4 minutes
of the time and pulled and pushed the bar a great deal, though up and
down and out instead of back. In his aimless pushings and pullings he
nearly succeeded. He failed in 5 in a second trial also. I then opened
the door of the cage, sat down beside it, held out my hand, and when he
came to me took his right paw and with it (he being held in front of the
box) pushed the bar back (and pulled the door open in those cases when it
did not fall open of itself). He reached in and took the food and went
back to the top of his cage and ate it. (No. 1 generally did this, while
No. 3 generally stayed by me.) I then tried him alone; result 10 F; no
activity at all. On January 5th I put the box in; result 10 F. He was
fairly active. He pulled at the bar but mostly from a position on the top
of the box and with his left hand; no attempts like the one I had tried
to teach him. Being left alone he failed in 5. Being tried again with
the door of the cage open and me sitting as I had done while putting him
through the act, he succeeded in 7.00 by pushing the bar with his head
in the course of efforts to poke his head in at the door. I then put him
through the act 10 times and left him to himself. He failed in 5.00; no
activity. I then sat down by the cage as when teaching him. He failed in
5; little activity. Later in the day I put him through the act 10 times
and then left him to himself. He failed in 5; little activity. I sat
down as before. He failed in five; little activity. On January 6th I put
him through the act 10 times and then left him. He failed in 10. This
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account