View report page

69
required little or no instruction by the experimenter, and where
intelligence was assumed to manifest itself in the adequate handling
of a practical situation.
Thus, the methods more closely resembled those employed in
experiments with intelligent animals (notably Koehler's famous
experiments with chimpanzees) than those with older children.
In the tests, most of which were especially devised by Miss Adler,
a desirable object could be obtained by the child only if he was
able to remove or circumvent a material obstacle in the way between
him and that object, e.g., a coloured ring was slipped over a vertical
rod, attached to a board, in view of the child; the child had to puH
the ring off the rod. In subsequent tests rods of varied shapes of
increasing complexity were used; or the experimenter dropped
a tiny sweet into a bottle and left the child to retrieve the sweet
from it. In a more complex task the child had first to extract a cork
before he could set about to secure the sweet. In yet another test
a cupboard was used in which a toy was placed; this remained visible
through a glass window, the door was fastened by a simple latch
in view of the child. In a more complicated form the toy was first
placed into a jar, then the jar put in the cupboard and the door
fastened. The question was, from what age onwards the child
was capable to grasp simple problems of the kind described, and in
what particular way such understanding develops during the second
year of life. By comparing the achievements and behaviour of
children at ascending age levels during the age period concerned
(12, 15, 18 and 24 months) conclusions were drawn as to the intellectual
progress incurred.
In this short report only some of the more general and important
results can be outlined: The rate of progress between the ages of
one and two proved to be a rapid one. The variance in individual
intelligence was over-shadowed by the increase in intellectual
capacity with advancing age. Thus, tests which presented an insoluble
problem for the youngest children were solved in a matter-offact
way by the older ones, and even the most advanced one-year
old fell short of the achievement of the least endowed two-year old.
The widely held opinion that in pre-school years girls are more
precocious than boys could not be confirmed with these tests of a
practical nature. Boys and girls showed themselves equally
capable, or the boys slightly superior to the girls.
At one year of age a child is hardly capable of appreciating
a problem situation, and seems unable to apprehend the relation