We have yet to consider three further methods available for the purposes of vocational psychology, that of "self-analysis," and that of the "consensus of opinion" of one's associates, and that of inferring the characteristics of the individual from his achievement in the work of the school curriculum. In the absence of more reliable ways of determining the capacities, interests and vocational aptitudes of individuals in the past, and whenever there was any question of selection, fitness, or choice, four vague methods have often been followed. (1) Either the individual undertook the first available type of employment, tried it out, and then persevered in it or abandoned it for a trial at some other type of work until a suitable occupation was found; or (2) he continued at the original work and made the most of the results and of the ensuing satisfactions or dissatisfactions; or (3) he felt more or less clearly drawn to some particular occupation because of a keen interest in it or because he believed himself to be particularly likely to succeed in it because of his own analysis of his aptitudes and characteristics; or (4) he consulted friends and associates, asking them to advise him on the basis of their impression of his individuality and powers. The unsatisfactoriness, waste and misery of the first two of these methods are largely responsible for the development of a conscious attempt at the vocational guidance of youth. Perhaps if more use were made of the two remaining methods we should never have been moved to initiate the laborious work called for by the psychographic and the test methods. Not enough critical attention has been given to the methods of self-analysis and to the validity of the judgments passed on us by our associates. The difficulty encountered when one seeks for information on such questions as the following indicates the desirability of further and closer study of these matters. 1. In the individual's analysis of his own personality, are formal guidance and method needed, is special terminology useful, and the recorded experience of others an aid? 2. If so, what sort of guide or scheme or system may such self-analysis profitably follow? 3. Have such guides to the introspective analysis of the self been formulated, and by whom, where, and when? 4. How reliable and consistent are an individual's judgments of his own characteristics, interests, and aptitudes? Has one any constant tendency to overestimate or underestimate himself? 5. Do the degree of reliability and consistency, and this constant error vary in any way with the individual, with the circumstances, and with the particular trait that is being estimated? 6. How is the individual's judgment of himself likely to compare with the impression of him which his associates form? To what degree does this vary with the individual, the trait, and the associates?