Читать книгу A Study of Association in Insanity - A. J. Rosanoff - Страница 22

Table of Contents

*Normal Reactions.*—Inasmuch as the frequency tables do not exhaust all normal possibilities of reaction, a certain number of reactions which are essentially normal are to be found among the individual reactions. In order to separate these from the pathological reactions, we have compiled an appendix to the frequency tables, consisting mainly of specific definitions of groups of words to be included under each stimulus word in our list. This appendix will be found at the end of this paper.

A word of explanation is perhaps due as to the manner in which the appendix has been compiled. It was developed in a purely empirical way, the basis being such individual reactions, given by both normal and insane subjects, as seemed in our judgment to be obviously normal.

It must be acknowledged that the appendix falls short of all that might be desired. In the first place, its use involves to some slight extent the play of personal equation, and it therefore constitutes a source of error; in the second place, it is in some respects too inclusive while in other respects it is not sufficiently so. However, the error due to personal equation is slight; the inclusion of certain "far-fetched" or even frankly pathological reactions may be discounted by bearing in mind that the general value of this group is not equal to that of the group of common reactions; and the number of strictly normal reactions which are not included is after all small. Our experience has shown us that the appendix constitutes an important aid in the analysis of individual reactions.

*Pathological Reactions. Derivatives of Stimulus Words.*—We place here any reaction which is a grammatical variant or derivative of a stimulus word. The tendency to give such reactions seems to be dependent upon a suspension or inhibition of the normal process by which the stimulus word excites the production of a new concept, for we have here not a production of a new concept but a mere change in the form of the stimulus word. As examples of such reactions may be mentioned: eating—eatables, short—shortness, sweet—sweetened, quiet—quietness.

*Partial Dissociation.*—We have employed the term dissociation to indicate a rupture of that bond—whatever be its nature-which may be supposed to exist normally between stimulus and reaction and which causes normal persons to respond in the majority of instances by common reactions. And we speak of partial dissociation where there is still an obvious, though weak and superficial, connection. Under this heading we can differentiate four types:

*Non-specific Reactions* have already been defined; we distinguish those in this class from those in the class of common reactions by means of the frequency tables.

*Sound Reactions.*—This type requires no explanation; the main difficulty is to decide what degree of sound similarity between stimulus and reaction should be deemed sufficient for placing a reaction under this heading. The total number of different sounds used in language articulation is, of course, small, so that any two words are liable to present considerable chance similarity. Some time ago we estimated the average degree of sound similarity between stimulus words and reaction words in a series of one hundred test records obtained from normal persons; we found that on the average 14.53 per cent of the sounds of the stimulus words were reproduced, in the same order, in the reaction word. Our experience finally led us to adopt the following general rule: A reaction is to be placed under this heading when fifty per cent of the sounds of the shorter word of the pair are identical with sounds of the longer word and are ranged in the same order.

Among sound reactions we occasionally find *neologisms*; for these a separate heading is provided. Possibly their occurrence may be taken as an indication of an exaggerated tendency to respond by sound reactions.

*Word Compliments.*—Here we include any reaction which, added to the stimulus word, forms a word, a proper name, or a compound word in common use.

*Particles of Speech.*—Under this heading we include articles, numerals, pronouns, auxiliary verbs, adverbs of time, place and degree, conjunctions, prepositions, and interjections.

*Complete Dissociation.*—Here are included reactions which appear to be entirely unrelated to the corresponding stimulus words; in the case of such reactions the stimulus words seem to act, as Aschaffenburg has pointed out, merely as signals for discharge. This subdivision contains several types of reactions which seem to be dependent upon the phenomenon of perseveration; it contains also the rather important type of neologisms.

The phenomenon of *preservation* occurs in cases in which one may observe an abnormal immobility of attention. To react normally to a series of stimulus words requires on the part of the subject, in the first place, a certain alertness in order that he may grasp quickly and clearly the meaning of each word, and, in the second place, a prompt shifting of the mind from one reaction to the next. When such mental mobility is lacking the subject is liable to react not by a response adjusted to the stimulus word, but either by repeating a previous stimulus or reaction, or by giving a word associated to the preceding stimulus or reaction.

The names of the different types of reactions included under the heading of perseveration are sufficiently descriptive; we shall here refer only to those which require further definition.

*Association to Preceding Stimulus.*—Here is placed any reaction that is shown by the frequency tables to be related to the stimulus preceding the one in question. Seeming or even obvious relationship, if not established by reference to the frequency tables, is disregarded. In the tables, however, the combination may not exist in direct order but only in reverse order, in which case the reaction is included here. The following examples may serve as illustrations:

thief—night lion—pocket-book

Lion—pocket-book is not found in the frequency tables, and is, therefore, an individual reaction; thief—pocket-book, however, is found there; pocket-book is, therefore, classed in this case as an association to preceding stimulus.

table—fork dark—mutton

Dark—mutton is not found in the frequency tables; table—mutton is also not found there in the direct order, but is found in the reverse order, viz.: mutton—table; mutton is, therefore, classed in this case as an association to preceding stimulus.

*Association to Preceding Reaction.*—If either the reaction in question or the preceding reaction happens to be one of the stimulus words in our list, and a relationship between the two be found to exist by reference to the frequency tables—whether in direct or in reverse order—the reaction in question is classed as an association to preceding reaction. This is illustrated by the following examples:

eating—table mountain—floor

Mountain—floor is an individual reaction; table—floor

is found in the frequency tables; floor is, therefore, classed as an association to preceding reaction.

beautiful—flowers window—red

Window—red is an individual reaction; red—flowers is found in the frequency tables; therefore, red is classed as an association to preceding reaction.

In cases in which neither the reaction in question nor the preceding reaction happens to be one of our stimulus words, but a relationship between them may be judged to exist without considerable doubt, the reaction in question is also classed here. Example:

priest—father ocean—mother

Ocean—mother is an individual reaction; neither the word father nor the word mother is among our stimulus words; but the association between the words father and mother may be judged to exist without considerable doubt; therefore, in this case mother is classed as an association to preceding reaction.

In such cases as this personal equation must necessarily come into play; comparative uniformity of judgment may, however, be attained by systematically excluding any reaction the relationship of which to the preceding reaction is subject to any considerable doubt and by placing any such reaction in the unclassified group.

*Repetition of Previous Stimulus.*—Here we place any reaction which is a repetition of any previous stimulus from amongst the ten next preceding, at the same time placing *repetition of preceding stimulus* under a separate heading.

*Neologisms.*—Here we place the newly coined words, so commonly given by the insane, excepting such as possess a sound relationship to the stimulus word, for which, as already stated, a special place in the classification has been provided.

Neologisms might be divided into three types, as follows: (1) those which arise from ignorance of language (comfort—uncomfort, short—diminiature); (2) distortions of actual words, apparently of pathological origin and not due to ignorance (hungry—foodation, thief—dissteal); and (3) those which seem to be without any meaning whatever (scack, gehimper, hanrow, dicut). It is, however, impossible to draw clear-cut distinctions between these types, and for this reason we have made no provision in our classification for such division.

*Unclassified Reactions.*—This group is important, in the first place, because it is numerically a large one, and in the second place, because it contains certain fairly definite types of reactions which are placed here for the sole reason that we have not been able to find strictly objective criteria for their differentiation from other types.

It has already been stated that the frequency tables, even together with the appendix, fail to exhaust all normal possibilities of association, so that a certain small number of perfectly normal reactions must fall into the unclassified group. We submit the following examples:

music—listen smooth—suave sour—curdled earth—mound

Another type of reactions found in the unclassified group, though also normal, yet not obviously so until explained by the subject, is represented by those which originate from purely personal experiences, such as the following, given by normal subjects:

blossom—T. … . hammer—J. … .

The first of these reactions is explained by the subject's acquaintance with a young lady, Miss T. … , who has been nick-named "Blossom," and the second is explained by the subject's having among her pupils at school a boy by the name of J. … Hammer.

It would be difficult to estimate the proportion of such reactions in the unclassified group, but we have gained the general impression that it is small. An attempt to place them in a separate group could be made only with the aid of explanations from the subjects; such aid in the case of insane subjects is generally unreliable. Moreover, to class these reactions as strictly normal would perhaps be going too far, since their general value is obviously inferior to that of the common reactions; and in any case in which they are given in unusually large numbers they must be regarded as manifestation of a tendency to depart from the normal to the extent to which they displace common reactions. The next type of reactions met with in the unclassified group is characterized by a peculiarly superficial, or non-essential, or purely circumstantial relationship to the stimulus. Such reactions, though occasionally given by normal subjects, are more often given by insane ones, and seem to be somewhat characteristic of states of mental deterioration which are clinically rather loosely described as puerilism. We offer the following examples, given by normal subjects:

music—town sickness—summer child—unknown house—enter

Still another type of reactions to be considered in this connection consists of words which are in no way related to the corresponding stimulus words, but which arise from distraction of the subject by surrounding objects, sounds, and the like. In some cases the experimenter may be able to judge from the direction of the subject's gaze, from a listening attitude, and so on, that certain reactions are due to distraction. In other cases, particularly in cases of normal subjects, the fact that certain reactions are due to distraction may be determined by questioning the subject on this point immediately after making the test; In work with insane subjects, as we have several times had occasion to point out, such aid is generally not available.

The group of unclassified reactions includes also one more type of reactions which are of great importance both numerically and otherwise. These are the *incoherent reactions*, that is to say, reactions which are determined neither by the stimulus words, nor by the agency of perseveration, nor by distraction.

Although the occurrence of incoherent reactions is hardly subject to doubt, yet in no instance is it possible to establish with certainty that a given reaction is of this type, for in no instance can a remote, or an imagined, or a merely symbolic relationship between stimulus and reaction be positively excluded. Some, indeed, would assert that some such relationship must necessarily exist in every instance, at least in the domain of the subconscious. This circumstance necessitates the placing of this type of reactions in the unclassified group.

In practice it may be found advisable in some cases to analyze the unclassified reactions with a view to ascertaining to what extent each of the various types is represented among them. But one here treads on slippery ground, and one must be continually warned against the danger of erroneous conclusions.