The psychological question at the heart of the observation-error, called the personal equation, is this,--What are the conditions which hinder such a division of attention among the parts of the complex operation of coördinating sense-stimulations, that the processes which start simultaneously may proceed to equal clearness at the same time, and so be perceived as simultaneous? The facts sought in order to answer this question are the very same as some of those, at least, demanded by the "scope-of-attention" investigation when it really opens up to its true problem. W. Wirth[108] has recently shown, in an exhaustive criticism of the tachistoscopic method, that "scope of attention" is primarily concerned with the _relations_ of the processes present together, and that this demands a previous exhaustive study of their _relative clearnesses_. Earlier studies by the tachistoscopic method, as, for example those of Cattell[109] on the relatively short time for the perception of letters in words, as compared with that for separate letters, and the overlapping of processes in continuous reading, showed that the important question is, _what_ are the processes which may go on at the same time. Leaving out a statement of the nature of the processes is equivalent to leaving out one of the dimensions when endeavoring to state the contents of a solid. The scope of attention can be defined adequately only when one knows fully _what_ the separate processes are as well as _how many_ there are. This analysis, which the scope-of-attention problem demands, cannot fail to be directly fruitful for the solution of the time-displacement problem. The analysis of this larger problem directly involves the former. Any attempt to investigate the time-displacement of sense-impressions from simultaneous stimuli must inevitably place the highest value upon the whole detailed analysis of any moment of attentive effort.