Fig. 1 represents the average of the records of the six observers. The curve is based on the difference between the number of times the fourth members of the series were seen with and without preceding stimulus. The base-line represents the number of times the figure was seen without preceding stimulus, taken each day as the normal for that day. Figures above the base-line represent the greater, and those below the line, the less number of times the figure was seen with preceding stimulus, or reënforcement and inhibition, respectively. The first two points are the average of fifty-four observations; each point beyond the second is the average of 108 observations. Figs. 2, 3, 4, and 5 represent individual records constructed as Fig. 1, each point being the average of eighteen observations. The curve in Fig. 1 is somewhat misleading in showing points of maximum reënforcement at 3.19 sec., 3.75 sec., and 4.3 sec. In no individual case was this true. The reason for the crest at 3.75 sec., or at least for its height, is that in two cases reënforcement was considerable at this interval, and there was little inhibition to offset this in the general average. At 3.19 sec., which was the second interval of greatest reënforcement, for four out of the six observers, owing to practice, the reënforcement was not great (Fig. 4), but in no case was there inhibition at this point. Thus for the lack of strong positive effect at 3.19 sec. and the lack of strong negative effect at 3.75 sec., the two crests are the same height, while the first represents the maximum effect for four and the second for two observers. From these results, taking everything into consideration, my conclusions are: (1) If a stimulus precedes at various time-intervals its duplicate in a series of stimuli, it will alternately inhibit and reënforce the perceiving of the duplicate stimulus. (2) Within 4.5 sec. there are at least three points each of maximum inhibition and maximum reënforcement. (3) The points of maximum inhibition and likewise those of maximum reënforcement are separated by intervals of from .55 sec. to 1.2 sec.--more often by one of the two extremes than by any mean. (4) Up to 4.5 sec., as the time-interval increases, the maximum inhibition generally decreases, while the maximum enhancement correspondingly increases. What the limit of this periodic effect is, I cannot as yet say, as up to the present I have not used time-intervals beyond 4.3 sec. But from the intensity of the effect at this interval, I do not expect the limit to be within several seconds. FOOTNOTES: [Footnote 102: Ranschburg: Ueber die Bedeutung der Ähnlichkeit beim Erlernen, Behalten und bei der Reproduction, Journal der Psychologie und Neurologie, Bd. 5, p. 94.] [Footnote 103: Dr. R. M. Yerkes: The Sense of Hearing in Frogs, Journal of Comparative Neurology and Psychology, vol. 15, no. 4, 1905; also this vol. Harvard Psychological Studies.]