United States or Libya ? Vote for the TOP Country of the Week !
Taking the first line of table 1 below the explanatory headings, we note on April 19 ten trials, numbered 1 to 10, were given to Skirrl. In trial 1, with setting 1, he chose correctly the first time, and the record is therefore simply 1. In trial 2, setting 2, he incorrectly chose box 9, the first time. At his next opportunity, he chose box 8, which was the right one.
For his somewhat abortive and never long continued efforts to drag two boxes together or to place the one upon the other clearly enough indicate a tendency which would ultimately yield success. The possibility of imitation is not excluded, for Skirrl had opportunities to see Julius and the experimenter handle the boxes.
As a matter of fact, for the solution he required about four times the number of trials which Sobke required and twice as many as were necessary for Skirrl. Were we to measure the intelligence of these three animals by the number of trials needed in problem 1, Sobke clearly would rank first, Skirrl second, and Julius last of all.
As in the case of Skirrl, he was lured into the apparatus and was taught the route through the boxes to the starting point by being allowed to obtain food once each day in each of the nine boxes. The procedure was simple.
It is evident, therefore, that Skirrl in his first series of trials closely approximated expectation in the number of mistakes. By reading downward in any particular column of results, one obtains a description of the changes in the animal's reaction to a particular setting of the doors.
But, if the preliminary training were responsible for Sobke's tendency, it should be noted that it had very different effect upon Skirrl, and, as will be seen later, upon Julius. The results for the ten different settings of the doors for problem 1 as they appear in table 4 are of interest for a number of reasons.
My notes record that he worked quickly though shyly, wasted almost no time, made few errors of choice, and waited quietly during confinement in the boxes. In this, also, he differed radically from Skirrl who was restless and always tried to escape from confinement. Throughout the work on problem 1, punishment and reward were kept constant.
Following the control series given in connection with problem 1, an interval of rest lasting from August 12 to August 19 was allowed in order that Skirrl might in part at least lose the effects of his training and regain his customary interest in the apparatus by being allowed to obtain food easily instead of by dint of hard labor, labor which was harder by far, apparently, than physical activity because it demanded of the animal certain mental processes which were either lacking or but imperfectly functional.
This also was arranged in the same manner as for Julius, and on each of five days Skirrl was allowed at least thirty minutes to work for the bait. Either a banana or a carrot was each day placed on the board well beyond his reach, and one or two, usually two, small sticks were put into his cage.
How important is the species difference in this connection, I have no means to judge, but if we may not consider these different modes of behavior characteristic of P. rhesus as contrasted with P. irus, we must conclude that remarkable individual differences exist among monkeys, for whereas Skirrl is by nature a mechanical genius, Sobke has apparently no such disposition.
Word Of The Day