For the study of the interferences with the intellectual processes during stupor reaction, we have two sources of information: The first is derived from the account which the patient is able to give in regard to what he remembers as having taken place around him or in his mind during the stupor period; the second is the direct observation of partial stupor reactions. 1. Information Derived from the Patient’s Retrospective Account We will start with the cases of marked stupor mentioned in Chapter I. Anna G.’s (Case 1) psychosis commenced at home, and under observation lasted with great intensity for five months. She remembered only vaguely the carriage going to the Observation Pavilion, had no recollection of the latter, nor of her transfer to the Manhattan State Hospital and of most of the stay at the Institute ward, including the tube- or spoon-feeding which had to be carried on for four months. She also claimed that she did not know where she was until four or five months after admission. She was amnesic for her delusions and hallucinations. Of Caroline DeS. (Case 2) we have no information. Of Mary F. (Case 3), whose stupor began at home and under observation lasted two years, we find that she had no recollection of coming to the hospital, what ward she came to, who the doctor and nurses were (with whom she became acquainted later), in fact she claimed that for about a year she did not know where she was. But she remembered having been tube-fed (this took place over a long period). Mary D.’s (Case 4) stupor also commenced at home, and under observation lasted for three months. She had no recollection of going to the Observation Pavilion, of the transfer to Manhattan State Hospital, and of a considerable part of her stay here, including such obtrusive facts as a presentation before a staff meeting, an extensive physical and a blood examination, and she claimed not to have known for a long time where she was. Annie K.’s (Case 5) stupor commenced at home. Although she recalled the last days there and some ideas and events at the Observation Pavilion, the memory of the journey to Ward’s Island was vague, as was that of entrance to the ward, and she claimed not to have known where she was for quite a while. Specific occurrences, such as the taking of her picture (with open eyes two months after admission), an examination in a special room, her own mixed-up writing (end of second week) were not remembered. But it is quite interesting that an angry outburst of another patient within this same period, which was evidently not recorded, is clearly remembered.