A method of measuring the development of the intelligence of young children

Front matter

A Method of Measuring

the Development of

the Intelligence of

Part I. Description Of Tests

CHILDREN OF THREE YEARS.

I. Shows nose, eyes and mouth. — To perform the test one should look steadily at the child, attract his attention, and repeat several times : "Show me your nose," or "Put your finger on your nose," and follow this by repeating the same order for the eyes and the mouth. Sometimes the child does not comply because he is distracted, or because he is timid and too bashful to do that which is desired, but usually, with a little insistence, a response is secured. Sometimes a child shows his nose by thrusting it forward, without making any hand movement, or shows his mouth by opening it, as would an animal. This is, in fact, an animal stage, when the hand is still a paw, and not an organ used for significant or expressive movements.

As this test and the following ones are especially applicable to very young children, it is necessary that the experimenter be warned that many very young children, especially those of three and four years, remain voluntarily mute and motionless when questioned. Some consent to do little acts, such as showing where the nose is, but they refuse to speak ; speech seems to require a greater effort than gesture. The directors of the Ecole niaternelle can always point out children who, in class, never answer the teacher, sometimes even after two years of attendance; the majority of these mutes chatter away with their comrades ; they are mutes only in class. Others, fewer in number, never speak in school either to teachers or comrades; but their parents testify that they talk at home. Teachers experience great difficulties in the effort to encourage sociability in such children. We recall a charming director who told us that for a period of two years all her efforts to make a certain little boy of four years speak were in vain ; she finally succeeded, thanks to the help of a cat. One day she left the child alone playing with the cat, and gradually he began to talk to it. He said: "Good morning, Minet." The miracle was wrought, the child's tongue was loosed.

Imagine the difficulties of an experimenter who, wishing to make an examination of intelligence, is met by such a silence. What should be done? The help of the teacher is often useful. If she is intelligent, she knows what to say to her children to reassure them and arouse their courage. A caress to one, a reprimand to another, and all goes well. We have seen children who persistently refused to perform a test, declaring themselves unable; for example, they stood before some ribbon, refusing to make a bow or even to touch it; after a sharp reprimand they decided to work and produced a beautiful rosette.

11. Repeats two digits. — The repetition of numbers requires very nearly the same sort of effort as the repetition of sentences ; however, as numbers have so much less meaning than sentences, they make little appeal to the intellect or interest, and therefore require a greater effort of attention. As a result, a child of three years who can repeat a sentence of six syllables can repeat only two digits. The association of ideas triples the memory span.

The experiment is performed as follows : The experimenter tells the child to listen, and begins by pronouncing a single digit. The child repeats it. Two digits, not consecutive, are then given; for example, 3-7, or 6-4. They should be pronounced slowly, an interval of half a second being allowed between the two. If an error is made, or some speech defect prevents the understanding of the repetition, another beginning should be made. It suffices that an exact repetition be made once in three trials. When the repetition of two digits is possible, three are tried, always at the rate of two per second, and always avoiding special emphasis; one success in three is still sufficient. Many children of three years who repeat two digits with ease are incapable of repeating three; one additional digit greatly increases the difficulty. When the repetition of three digits is possible, five are tried, always under the same conditions of rate and of pronunciation, and still considering one success in three sufficient. It proves much more difficult to repeat five digits than three. A great variety of errors are made by the children; first a complete silence, then a sort of vagueness and uncertainty of pronunciation; then a partial repetition in which only the last numbers and sometimes only the last number are given; next a tendency to give numbers which have not been mentioned. Such numbers are not a chance choice, but depend upon the natural order of numbers; thus, a subject to whom one gives the series 5-8-2-7-4, says 5-8-2-3-4, the two naturally calling up the three. Sometimes the phenomenon is still more clear, so striking that it implies a very feeble critical sense; as when a child who has completely forgotten the figures 0-8-2-7-9, says 1-2-3-4-5-6.

III. Enumerates objects in a picture. — Pictures are invaluable in the examination of children. The most inattentive child brightens up when shown a picture. It is an almost sure road to their confidence. Pictures may be used for many purposes ; the child may be asked to point to the various pictured objects as the examiner mentions them; if he succeeds, he has the ability of immediately associating the auditory impression of the word with the object for which it stands. In this test we use the picture to make the child talk. We reverse the former method, having the child name the objects which he sees pictured before him, thus testing his ability to recall the name of an object which he sees. It is much more difficult for the child to pass in thought from an object to its name than from a name to the corresponding object. Before the child is placed a picture on which appear many objects with which he is familiar and which are interesting to him. He is then asked to tell us what he sees. He thus has the opportunity to use what language ability he may possess in expressing his ideas, and also the liberty of choosing those objects which please him most; the response will show us what interests the child and will also give us an idea of his mentality, of his manner of perceiving, interpreting and reasoning. The test has the remarkable advantage of serving as a diagnostic test of three different intellectual levels. The responses of the subject indicate whether he is at the level of three, seven, or twelve years. There are very few tests which yield such rich results. If we add that the test is one of those which amuse children the most, and is most useful in combatting the persistent silence of the little ones, it seems reasonable to conclude that we have found by chance a test of exceptional value. We place it above all others ; and were we limited to one test, we would without hesitation choose this one.

We use three engravings which are reproduced in the appendix (Fig. 1, 2 and 3). If care is taken other analogous pictures may be substituted, but ours have a certain standardized difficulty, and therefore it is better to use them; all of ours contain people and suggest a story; these' are the essential conditions. The engravings are mounted on cards, and are presented one after the other to the child, who is asked: "What is this?" Then, if the child is very young, he may respond naively : "It is a picture," or "It is a postal card." The question is then put in another form : "Tell me what you see there." It is very rare, quite exceptional, for the child to remain silent. Even at the age of three they are curious about the picture, and this leads them to reflect, as It does the older and wiser. The responses obtained by us are of three distinct kinds, each of which is characteristic of a different intellectual level.

1. Enumeration. — These responses are the most elementary. The child enumerates separately the persons and objects which he recognizes in the picture, without establishing any connection between them. He names only common objects. In the most elementary form the responses are limited to the following: "a gentleman," "a man," "a woman," "a papa," "a carriage," "a little child." Some very young children use the article the, "the child," "the gentleman," "the woman." Sometimes, instead of naming people, the child chooses objects: "a bed," "a table." Notice it is the objects which are named and not the action. When shown the second picture a child of three will say: "a gentleman;" we never found one who said, "he sleeps," or one who mentioned the action or described the people. A child of three who would make such a remark would be much in advance of its age. At three years one is at the stage of recognition, or identification of objects; this is the important, fundamental work in the perception of the external world, in comparison with which all other processes of perception are only complementary. The degree of development of this fundamental process of identification shows itself in different ways ; it is revealed by simple addition; the number of objects named increases; instead of one — two, three or four are named. When several are mentioned, the question of order arises. Most often with our three pictures the children mentioned the people first; but there were exceptions to this rule, and sometimes inanimate objects were first chosen. Thus, for the third picture : "two tables, a chair, a bed, a man," for the second picture : "a man, a woman, a bench/' for the first: "a wagon, a gentleman, a bucket, a basket." Sometimes a curious error is produced by suggestion when using the first picture ; noticing the wagon, the child says : "a wagon, a horse."

In a third variety, scarcely superior to the preceding, the objects are not named separately, but are related, in a very feeble manner it is true, by the conjunctions, and, with or and then. "A gentleman and a lady," "a wagon, and then a gentleman," "a gentleman with a lady."

This type of response by enumeration is sometimes met with in older children who are retarded; it therefore is distinctly characteristic; there is a persistence of the form of enumeration, but it is used in conjunction with a large number of words, while the enumeration of a young and normal child is, on the contrary, very brief. This difference is explained by the fact that the retarded child of eleven years who is still at the mental level of a child of six or seven years, has the advantage over the latter of a much longer experience ; having lived longer, he possesses a larger vocabulary. Example: Mad. . . .a child of ten and a half who has an intellectual development of seven years (we explain later how we fix the intellectual level with such precision) gave us the following enumeration in reference to the first picture: / see an old man, and then a child, there is a flood, there is water, a wagon, a basket, a brush, a pail, two wheels, a carpet. Another example of fluent enumeration, still more characteristic, is found in the following response of Lau...., child of thirteen years, four years retarded intellectually : A gentleman, a zvagon, a child, a pail, a basket; behind, a piece of wood; hehind, some rocks.

In all cases the most frequent type of response is credited.

2. Description, This is the level of seven years, while the response by enumeration corresponds to the level of three years. The difference is great. Here the characteristics of the people and the nature of the objects are mentioned; moreover, attention is called to their relations; with the result that phrases are substituted for simple words.

Print 1 : There is a man and a little boy, who are pulling a wagon.

Print 2: A man and then a woman, who are asleep on a bench.

Print 3 : There is a man standing on his bed to look out of the window. A man looking at himself in the glass.

3. Merpretation. The meaning of the picture or the nature of the people is told either by a brief word or by an explanatory remark, and often there is even an emotional note, of sadness or of sympathy ; it is possible that this emotional note exists with children who make a more simple response, but they are unable to express it. We call these responses interpretations, because they go beyond the visual impression; there is a real effort to explain the situation depicted. Examples :

Print 1 : A rag picker. — A poor man moving. — There are some people moving zmthout paying the rent.— There is a man in trouble.

Print 2: They are in want. — A miserable creature. — They are poor creatures sitting on a bench, and they have no home to sleep in. — It is night, they are poor and needy.

Print 3: A prisoner. — That represents a prisoner, a man who is vn prison, who climbs on his pallet to look through the prison window which is barred.

If the words moving, miserable and prisoner are used in the descriptions, it is safe to conclude that the pictures have been interpreted. The hierarchy which we have introduced in classifying our responses can not be defended philosophically. An observer, hostile to all theory, would claim that descriptions are superior to interpretations because they are less subject to error; they state exact facts, adding nothing, while interpretation is conjecture, and may be purely fanciful. "Hypotheses non fingo," such a critic will say. Such discussions will arise. The point which we have made as a result of our studies with children, certainly merits use as an argument in the debate. As only the older children use interpretation we conclude that a higher intellectual level is necessary for its production. But the question is a complicated one ; it is necessary not only to take into account the intellectual level, but also the possible deviations and errors peculiar to the same level. We recall having shown our pictures to an adult, known to be rather foolish. He made many interpretations, but most peculiar ones. For example, the first print inspired the following response: It is a scene taking place in the month of February. Let us analyze this conjecture. It is evidently an interpretation, but an altogether gratuitous one, which it is impossible either to confirm or to refute. The scene could just as well be placed in October, November, December, January or March. Why, then, this precision, which is at the same time useless and unjustifiable? This response is an interpretation, and in our classification it is superior to the descriptive response of a child of seven years; but in addition it betrays a lack of judgment; this lack of judgment is independent of the hierarchy of responses.

IV. Gives family name. — We now ask for a piece of information which a child of three certainly should possess ; its family name. All children of this age know their first names, that goes without saying, or the pet name by which they are usually called ; but the family name is not so familiar. However, they are expected to know it at school, and at the "Maternelle" they are habitually called by their family name.

The child is asked: "What is your name?" If he only gives his first name, the last is insisted on. "Roger? And then? And then what? etc."

It sometimes happens that the child gives a name different from the one under which he has been entered. This often happens with illegitimate children, and also when a child's mother has had several husbands and changed the child's name with her own.

If a child fails to give his family name, he is asked what his mother's name is. But this question is too difficult for three years, and the answer: "Her name is Mamma," cannot be considered a bad response for this age.

V. Repeats a sentence of six syllables. — After the comprehension of words, the next step in the development of language is not, as one might think, the verbal expression of thought, the naming of desired objects, but a repetition of words heard. It is easier, apparently, to echo a word than to use it independently— to pass from an idea to a word. We have observed this to be the fact with both imbeciles and normal children. A child of three, if he will make the effort, can easily repeat a word or a phrase; it is sometimes difficult, however, to decide whether the repetition is correct, because such young children have a natural defect of pronunciation which we will call simply a vagueness, a baffling quality; this is produced by a stumbling over the words and by their incomplete production. This vagueness is not an actual defect of pronunciation, due to anatomical or functional defect of the speech organs; it is simply a lack of skill; therefore, this vagueness must be taken into consideration in the diagnosis of the intelligence. On closer study we find that this awkwardness, this lack of skill, is not limited to articulation, but appears also in the choice of words and in the formation of sentences ; for the adult forms are substituted more childish ones.*

For this test the following sentences are used, which have been chosen with the intention of using words very easy to understand :

/ am cold and hungry. (6 syllables.)

My name is Gaston Oh, the naughty dog. (lo syllables.)

Let us go for a long zvalk Give me the pretty little

bonnet. (i6 syllables.)

These sentences should be given expressively. No error is allowed in the repetition. If the child is timid and remains silent, shorter sentences should be used; we use the following:

*TRANSLATOR'S N OTE.— The examples in the text are omitted here because they are applicable only to the French language. Analogous mistakes made by American children are the confusion of the gender and number of pronouns and misplaced prepositions.

Papa. (2 syllables.)

Hat. Pair of shoes. (4 syllables.)

/ am cold and hungry. (6 syllables.)

/ have a handkerchief with me. (8 syllables.)

My name is Gaston. Oh, the naughty dog. (10 syllables.)

It rains in the garden. John has finished his task. (12 syllables.)

We are enjoying ourselves greatly. I have caught a mouse. (14 syllables.)

Let us go for a long walk. Give me the pretty little bonnet. (16 syllables.)

Charlotte has just torn her new dress. I have given two, cents to that beggar. (18 syllables.)

It is not mecessary to hurt the birds. It is night, all the world rests in sleep. (20 syllables.)

A child of three can repeat a sentence of six syllables; it cannot repeat one of ten.

CHILDREN OF FOUR YEARS,

I. Gives own sex. — "Are you a little boy or a little girl?'' This is the very simple question which we use. Three-yearold children do not all succeed in answering it. The correct response is: "A little boy" or "A little girl." Sometimes the child merely says yes or no. It is then necessary to ask two distinct questions: "Are you a little boy?" "Are you a little girl?" It takes very little to confuse at this age.

Children of three years may fail, but a normal child of four always answers this question of sex correctly. However, we expect a great change in the mental state to take place between the third and the fourth year.

II. Names key, knife, penny. — Another test of spoken language, but differing from the language suggested by pictures; it is much more difficult. In a picture the child chooses what he wishes to name, and names those objects which he recognizes ; here we choose the object ; that is, we force him to name some one object and no other. These are differences which on a priori judgment seem insignificant; but in reaUty they are great. The proof is that the majority of children of three years succeed with the picture test and fail when asked to name the objects. It is true that the objects are a little less familiar than men and women, for which children show a preference in the picture test. The child is shown successively three familiar objects — a key, a closed knife and a cent — and is asked: "What is that? What is it called?" The key is properly named, sometimes with a defective pronunciation. The penknife is usually called a knife, and the penny, pennies. Such little errors are excused, but it is necessary that the names of the objects be known.

In our choice of objects we are guided by the fact that all experimenters are likely to have a penknife, a key, and a penny about them, and our endeavor is to use as little special apparatus as possible.

III. Repeats three digits. — This test is conducted in the same manner as that calling for the repetition of two digits. No further remarks are necessary.

IV. Compares two lines. — Here are some tests which present unexpected difficulties. An imbecile who understands when one says: "Go and open the door," when the words are not supplemented by either a gesture or a glance in the right direction, is unable to compare two lines in regard to their length. Does he see that the two lines are of unequal length? It is quite possible. If it were two biscuits, would he take the longer or the shorter? That is yet to be determined. But he does not comprehend the words: "the longer;" he does not understand that he is asked to compare two lines, and, pointing at random, he foolishly puts his finger on the space beWeen the two lines. The child of three years does the same thing. Not until its fourth year does a normal child succeed with this test.

The test is conducted as follows : Two lines, one 5 centimeters in length, and one 6, are drawn with ink on white paper; they are parallel and separated by a distance of three centimeters. The lines are shown to the child: "You see these lines. Tell me which is the longer." No hesitation is allowed. Sometimes the child puts its finger between the two lines. That is sufficient, unless the child corrects himself, for any hesitation is considered a failure. The test is a short one, easy to perform and easy to interpret.

CHILDREN OF FIVE YEARS.

I. Compares two weights. — This is a comparison similar to that of the lines; but one judges the lines at a glance, while it is necessary to take the boxes in the hand and heft them ; often they are taken in the same hand and compared successively. Conclusion : Very few children younger than five succeed with this test, while those of four succeed in comparing the length of the lines.

Four boxes are used, the same in appearance and volume, and weighing respectively 3 grams and 12 grams ; 6 grams and 15 grams. First, the two boxes of 3 and 12 grams are used. They are placed on the table before the child, with a distance of 5 or 6 centimeters between them. The child is asked : "You see these boxes. Tell me which is the heavier." The correct response consists in taking the boxes and hefting them one after the other in the same hand, or at the same time in two hands, and pointing out the box which weighs 12 grams. To make sure that the choice is not the result of chance, the two boxes of 6 and 15 grams are then presented; then the first two boxes are again used and the results compared. If there remains the least doubt, repeat the test. A very young child behaves differently. When asked the question, he responds at once by pointing, quite at random, at a box, without thinking of weighing it. We overlook this naive error, which may sometimes be explained by thoughtlessness, and sometimes by suggestibility or a desire to please us, and we say to the child: "No, that is not the way. You must take the boxes in your hands and weigh them." This supplementary instruction is sufficient to orient most subjects; so much the worse for the others. We have observed curiously the errors made by these last. Here are some of them : To lift only one box and declare it to be the heavier; to place the two boxes side by side in the same hand and declare that one is the heavier ; in this case the weighing is much more difficult without being impossible; finally, to place them one on top of the other in the same hand. This is still more defective as a method of weighing; however, it is still possible to detect the difiference in weight.

This test includes two quite distinct operations ; one consists in understanding that the weights of the two boxes are to be compared, and the consequent act of comparing them ; the other consists in appreciating the difference in the two weights. The first operation is much more difficult than the second; one can even say that it depends on the general intelligence and presupposes a high intellectual level, while the second depends on the much more simple faculty of feeling a difference in weight, and exists at a much lower intellectual level, perhaps one of only two years; this is proven by the fact that when a child, in spite of all possible explanations, fails to take the weights and compare them, it is often sufficient to place the weights one in each hand and ask him which is the heavier to secure from him the correct gesture. The awkwardness with which a child takes the weights, hefts them and compares them, and the surety with which he shows that he feels the difference in weight, is always an interesting contrast.

II. Copies a square. — This is the first time that we have put a penholder into the child's hand.

A square with a diameter of from 3 to 4 centimeters is drawn with ink, and the child is asked to reproduce it, using pen and ink. The use of pen and ink increases the difficulty of the task and a pencil must not be substituted. Young subjects reduce the size of the figure; this is of little importance if it is recognizable. We give (Fig. 4 of the Appendix) some specimens of reproduction which we consider as tolerable (1, 2, 3) and other reproductions which seem to us so defective that they constitute a failure (4, 5, 6).

III. Repeats sentences of ten syllables. See above.

IV. Counts four pennies. — The objection is made that enumeration is a test of scholarship which implies instruction rather than intelligence. The objection is just; but where is the being so deprived of tutelage that no one has ever taught him to count? We have studied many imbeciles in the asylums ; all those who have sufficient intelligence to count have learned to do so. In spite of the compulsory education laws, there still remain many illiterate people; it is said that there are more than five per cent, among the soldiers, but has one ever met an individual who has never learned to count if his intelligence permitted it? Such an one would be very rare.

The study of the act of counting is very complicated, and it will be seen by what follows that this little test, which is of great practical importance, appears many times in our Scale. To be able to count it is necessary to know many things; first, it is necessary to be able to recite the numbers in serial order correctly; it is necessary, also, to be able to apply each number to a different object. We have not used as a test the simple recitation of the figures because this is an affair of memory; we prefer the act of counting, which presupposes some judgment. We ask the child to count four pennies.

Four penn^s are placed on the table ; they are placed in a row, not in a pile. The experimenter says : "See these pennies. Count them. Tell me how many there are." Some children, without counting, answer at once, giving any number at random. Whether it be correct or not, such answer should not be noted. The child must be made to count them.

pointing with his finger. Any error constitutes a failure. At three years a child cannot count four pennies; at four years nearly half the children succeed; at five years only retarded children fail. It is truly a test for five years.

V. Game of patience with two pieces. — This is a game demanding an arrangement, a combining of pieces, which pleases children; they often amuse themselves at school by constructing objects with cubes. It is a game and at the same time a work for the intelligence, operating with the given material, some sensations and some movements. If the operation is analyzed, it is found to consist of the following elements : 1. To keep in mind the end to be attained, that is to say, the figure to be formed ; it is necessary to comprehend this end; it is necessary also to think about it, not to lose sight of it. 2. To try different combinations, under the influence of this directing idea, which often guides the efforts of the child, though he be unconscious of the fact. 3. To judge the formed combination, compare it with the model, and decide whether it is the correct one.