The Leipsic method of measuring the scope of attention by means of
the tachistoscope is the standard means of securing data as to the
_number_ of elementary processes which can go on at the same time in
consciousness. The same question, with which we are here concerned,
grows directly out of the investigation of the number of processes
which can go on together. Wundt acknowledges the great difficulty which
inheres in the investigation of this problem.[120] Cattell's early work
with the tachistoscope showing the numbers of letters, syllables, and
words, which could be apperceived under the same objective conditions,
indicated the great importance of what we may best call _meaning_, in
apperception, and its influence on the number of different processes
which may proceed together. In fact the number depends upon the
definition of the unit with which the investigator starts out. Wirth,
the latest emendator of the tachistoscopic method, has shown,[121] in
a very thoroughgoing and genuinely constructive criticism of earlier
work, that the one question of primary importance in investigations
of the content of the moment of consciousness, _i. e._, scope of
attention, is to set forth the relative clearnesses of the elementary
processes there proceeding together. He shows that the different grades
of clearness which may present themselves in the field of consciousness
of a momentary act indicate, on the one hand, the impossibility of
sharply distinguishing the "scope of attention" from the "scope of
consciousness" as Wundt uses these terms, and, on the other, the
serious indefiniteness of any merely numerical statement of the scope
of attention. His main purpose is to set forth a method by which
this field can be enriched by exhaustive statements of the relative
clearnesses of the processes going on at the same time. All the work of
the present study had been performed before the publication of Wirth's
work. Otherwise some of his suggestions would have been used in the
plan of the experiments following. I may say, however, that I believe
the method here used has its own distinctive merits.
GENERAL METHOD FOR TESTS IN COEXISTENCE
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account