Study of Association in Insanity | Page 2

the experimenter, so that he cannot see the
record; he is requested to respond to each stimulus word by one word,
the first word that occurs to him other than the stimulus word itself, and
on no account more than one word. If an untrained subject reacts by a
sentence or phrase, a compound word, or a different grammatical form
of the stimulus word, the reaction is left unrecorded, and the stimulus
word is repeated at the close of the test.
In this investigation no account is taken of the reaction time. The
reasons for this will be explained later.
The general plan has been first to apply the test to normal persons, so
as to derive empirically a normal standard and to determine, if possible,
the nature and limits of normal variation; and then to apply it to cases
of various forms of insanity and to compare the results with the normal
standard, with a view to determining the nature of pathological
variation.

§ 2. THE NORMAL STANDARD.
In order to establish a standard which should fairly represent at least all
the common types of association and which should show the extent of
such variation as might be due to differences in sex, temperament,
education, and environment, we have applied the test to over one
thousand normal subjects.
Among these subjects were persons of both sexes and of ages ranging
from eight years to over eighty years, persons following different
occupations, possessing various degrees of mental capacity and
education, and living in widely separated localities. Many were from
Ireland, and some of these had but recently arrived in this country;
others were from different parts of Europe, but all were able to speak
English with at least fair fluency. Over two hundred of the subjects,
including a few university professors and other highly practiced

observers, were professional men and women or college students.
About five hundred were employed in one or another of the New York
State hospitals for the insane, either as nurses and attendants or as
workers at various trades; the majority of these were persons of
common school education, but the group includes also, on the one hand,
a considerable number of high school graduates; and on the other hand,
a few laborers who were almost or wholly illiterate. Nearly one
hundred and fifty of the subjects were boys and girls of high school age,
pupils of the Ethical Culture School, New York City. The remaining
subjects form a miscellaneous group, consisting largely of clerks and
farmers.

§ 3. THE FREQUENCY TABLES.
From the records obtained from these normal subjects, including in all
100,000 reactions, we have compiled a series of tables, one for each
stimulus word, showing all the different reactions given by one
thousand subjects in response to that stimulus word, and the frequency
with which each reaction has occurred. [1] These tables will be found at
the end of this paper.
[Footnote 1: A similar method of treating associations has been used by
Cattell (Mind, Vol. XII, p. 68; Vol. XIV, p. 230), and more recently by
Reinhold (Zeitschr. f. Psychol., Vol. LIV, p. 183), but for other
purposes.]
With the exception of a few distinctive proper names, which are
indicated by initials, we have followed the plan of introducing each
word into the table exactly as it was found in the record. In the
arrangement of the words in each table, we have placed together all the
derivatives of a single root, regardless of the strict alphabetical
order.[1]
[Footnote 1: It should be mentioned that we have discovered a few
errors in these tables. Some of these were made in compiling them
from the records, and were evidently due to the assistant's difficulty of
reading a strange handwriting. Other errors have been found in the
records themselves. Each of the stimulus words butter, tobacco and
king appears from the tables to have been repeated by a subject as a
reaction; such a reaction, had it occurred, would not have been accepted,
and it is plain that the experimenter wrote the stimulus word in the

space where the reaction word should have been written. Still other
errors were due to the experimenter's failure to speak with sufficient
distinctness when reading off the stimulus words; thus, the reaction
barks in response to dark indicates that the stimulus word was probably
understood as _dog_; and the reactions blue and color in response to
bread indicate that the stimulus word was understood as red.]
The total number of different words elicited in response to any stimulus
word is limited, varying from two hundred and eighty words in
response to anger to seventy-two words in response to needle.
Furthermore, for the great majority of subjects the limits are still
narrower; to take a striking instance, in response