To turn from the nature and number of Hans's errors, to their distribution,--observation proved the hypothesis that the nearer two cloths lay together, the greater was the chance of their being mistaken one for the other. If we designate as "error 1" all those cases in which Hans went to cloth II instead of to cloth I, cloth III instead of cloth II, to V instead of IV, etc., and as "error 2" when he mistook III for I, IV for II, in fine, whenever he went two places too far to the right or left, and as "error 3" whenever he went three places too far to either side of the cloth desired, we find the following grouping of errors: With Mr. von Osten, a total of 63 errors: 73% "error 1" 21% "error 2" 4% "error 3" 1% "error 4" 1% "error 5" With Mr. Pfungst, a total of 64 errors: 68% "error 1" 20% "error 2" 11% "error 3" 1% "error 4" 0% "error 5". The most frequently recurring error, therefore, was the one in which the horse, instead of going to the cloth desired, approached the one immediately adjacent. On page 79 I said that Hans's errors were without system, but only in so far as it was impossible to explain them on a basis of the colors which seemingly were mistaken one for the other. A part of a series in which Mr. von Osten acted as questioner may serve as an illustration. The order given is that of the experimental series as it occurred. Five colored cloths were used. Color of the cloth asked for: blue, brown, brown, brown, brown, brown, green, green. | | | | | | | | brought: orange, orange, green, green, yellow, green, blue, orange. Place of cloth asked for: V II II II II II III III | | | | | | | | brought: IV IV III III I III V IV The interpretation of this series which it would be hard to explain by a reference to the colors which were mistaken, is simply this: Cloths lying near together were regularly mistaken on the part of the horse.