Now finally, as regards the apparent failure of the change in _SSW_ to lengthen the second interval, for which we are seeking to account; the comparatively great loss of time occurring where the change of attitude would naturally be most difficult (that is, where it is complicated with a change of attention from a strong stimulation to the higher key of a weak stimulation) is sufficient to explain why with most subjects the lengthening effect upon the second interval is more than neutralized. The individual differences mentioned in the preceding paragraph as affecting the relation of the two factors determining the constant error, enter here of course to modify the judgments and cause disagreement among the results for different subjects. Briefly stated, the most important points upon which this discussion hinges are thus the following: We have shown-- 1. That the introduction of either a local difference or a difference of intensity in the tactual stimulations limiting an interval has, in general, the effect of causing the interval to appear longer than it otherwise would appear. 2. That the apparent exceptions to the above rule are, (_a_) that the _increase_ of the local difference in the first interval, the stimulated areas remaining unchanged, produces a slight _decrease_ in the subjective lengthening of the interval, and (_b_) that in certain cases a difference in intensity of the stimulations limiting the second interval apparently causes the interval to seem shorter than it otherwise would. 3. That the 'constant error' of time judgment is dependent upon the intensity of the stimulations employed, although the three stimulations limiting the two intervals remain of equal intensity. To harmonize these results we have found it necessary to assume: 1. That the length of a time interval is perceived as the amount of change in the sensation-complex corresponding to that interval. 2. That the so-called 'constant error' of time estimation is determined by two mutually opposing factors, of which the first is the _loss of time_ occasioned by the change of attitude at the division between the two intervals, and the second is the diminishing effect of _perspective_. It is evident, however, that this last assumption applies only to the conditions under which the results were obtained, namely, the comparison of two intervals marked off by three brief stimulations. * * * * * PERCEPTION OF NUMBER THROUGH TOUCH. BY J. FRANKLIN MESSENGER. The investigation which I am now reporting began as a study of the fusion of touch sensations when more than two contacts were possible. As the work proceeded new questions came up and the inquiry broadened so much that it seemed more appropriate to call it a study in the perception of number.