[Footnote 107: Pelman, _Allg. Zeit. f. Psych._, XXI., p. 74.]

[Footnote 108: _Allg. Zeit. f. Psych._, XXII., p. 407.]

[Footnote 109: Flournoy, _l.c._, p. 28.]

[Footnote 110: Binet, "Les Altérations," p. 125. Cf. also Loewenfeld's
statements on the subject in "Hypnotismus," 1901.]

[Footnote 111: _Cryptomnesia_ must not be regarded as synonymous with
_Hypermnesia_; by the latter term is meant the abnormal quickening of
the power of recollection which reproduces the memory-pictures as such.]

[Footnote 112: "Has any one at the end of the nineteenth century any
clear conception of what the poets in vigorous ages called inspiration?
If not, I will describe it. The slight remnant of superstition by
itself would scarcely have sufficed to reject the idea of being merely
incarnation, merely mouthpiece, merely the medium of superior forces.
The concept revelation in the sense that quite suddenly, with ineffable
certainty and delicacy, something is seen, something is heard, something
convulsing and breaking into one's inmost self, does but describe
the fact. You hear--you do not seek; you accept--asking not who is
the giver. Like lightning, flashes the thought, compelling without
hesitation as to form--I have had no choice" (Nietzsche's "Works," vol.
III., p. 482.).]

[Footnote 113: "There is an ecstasy so great that the immense strain of
it is sometimes relaxed by a flood of tears, during which one's steps
now involuntarily rush, and anon involuntarily lag. There is the feeling
that one is utterly out of hand, with the very distinct consciousness of
an endless number of fine thrills and titillations descending to one's
very toes;--there is a depth of happiness in which the most painful and
gloomy parts do not act as antitheses to the rest, but are produced and
required as necessary shades of colour in such an overflow of light"
(Nietzsche, "Ecce Homo," vol. XVII. of English translation, by A. M.
Ludovici, p. 103).]

[Footnote 114: Eckermann, "Conversations with Goethe," vol. III.]

[Footnote 115: Cf. Goerres, "Die christliche Mystik."]

[Footnote 116: Bresler, "Kulturhistorischer Beitrag zur Hysterie,"
_Allg. Zeits. f. Psych._ LIII., p. 333.]

[Footnote 117: Zündel, "Biographie Blumhardt's."]

[Footnote 118: "Le baragouin rapide et confus dont on ne peut jamais
obtenir la signification, probablement parce qu'il n'en a en effet
aucune, n'est qu'un pseudo-langage (p. 193) analogue au baragouinage par
lequel les enfants se donnent parfois dans leurs jeux l'illusion qu'ils
parlent chinois, indien ou 'sauvage'" (p. 152, Flournoy, _l.c._).]

[Footnote 119: See p. 63.]

[Footnote 120: Flournoy, _l.c._, p. 378.]

[Footnote 121: For a case of this kind see Krafft Ebing, "Lehrbuch," 4th
edition, p. 578.]

[Footnote 122: The limitation of the associative processes and the
concentration of attention upon a definite sphere of presentation can
also lead to the development of new ideas, which no effort of will
in the waking state would have been able to accomplish (Loewenfeld,
"Hypnotismus," p. 289).]

[Footnote 123: Zschokke, "Eine Selbstschau," III., Aufl. Aarau, 1843, p.
227 ff.]

[Footnote 124: Gilles de la Tourette says, "We have seen somnambulic
girls, poor, uneducated, quite stupid in the waking state, whose whole
appearance altered so soon as they were sent to sleep. Whilst previously
they were boring, now they are lively, alert, sometimes even witty" (Cf.
Loewenfeld, _l.c._, p. 132).]

CHAPTER II

THE ASSOCIATION METHOD

LECTURE I[125]

When you honoured me with an invitation to lecture at Clark University,
a wish was expressed that I should speak about my methods of work, and
especially about the psychology of childhood. I hope to accomplish this
task in the following manner:--

In my first lecture I will give to you the view points of my association
methods; in my second I will discuss the significance of the familiar
constellations; while in my third lecture I shall enter more fully into
the psychology of the child.

I might confine myself exclusively to my theoretical views, but I
believe it will be better to illustrate my lectures with as many
practical examples as possible. We will therefore occupy ourselves first
with the association test which has been of great value to me both
practically and theoretically. The history of the association method in
vogue in psychology, as well as the method itself, is, of course, so
familiar to you that there is no need to enlarge upon it. For practical
purposes I make use of the following formula:--

    1. head
    2. green
    3. water
    4. to sing
    5. dead
    6. long
    7. ship
    8. to pay
    9. window
    10. friendly
    11. to cook
    12. to ask
    13. cold
    14. stem
    15. to dance
    16. village
    17. lake
    18. sick
    19. pride
    20. to cook
    21. ink
    22. angry
    23. needle
    24. to swim
    25. voyage
    26. blue
    27. lamp
    28. to sin
    29. bread
    30. rich
    31. tree
    32. to prick
    33. pity
    34. yellow
    35. mountain
    36. to die
    37. salt
    38. new
    39. custom
    40. to pray
    41. money
    42. foolish
    43. pamphlet
    44. despise
    45. finger
    46. expensive
    47. bird
    48. to fall
    49. book
    50. unjust
    51. frog
    52. to part
    53. hunger
    54. white
    55. child
    56. to take care
    57. lead pencil
    58. sad
    59. plum
    60. to marry
    61. house
    62. dear
    63. glass
    64. to quarrel
    65. fur
    66. big
    67. carrot
    68. to paint
    69. part
    70. old
    71. flower
    72. to beat
    73. box
    74. wild
    75. family
    76. to wash
    77. cow
    78. friend
    79. luck
    80. lie
    81. deportment
    82. narrow
    83. brother
    84. to fear
    85. stork
    86. false
    87. anxiety
    88. to kiss
    89. bride
    90. pure
    91. door
    92. to choose
    93. hay
    94. contented
    95. ridicule
    96. to sleep
    97. month
    98. nice
    99. woman
    100. to abuse

This formula has been constructed after many years of experience. The
words are chosen and partially arranged in such a manner as to strike
easily almost all complexes which occur in practice. As shown above,
there is a regulated mixing of the grammatical qualities of the words.
For this there are definite reasons.[126]

Before the experiment begins the test person receives the following
instruction: "Answer as quickly as possible with the first word that
occurs to your mind." This instruction is so simple that it can easily
be followed. The work itself, moreover, appears extremely easy, so that
it might be expected any one could accomplish it with the greatest
facility and promptitude. But, contrary to expectation, the behaviour is
quite otherwise.

I.--AN EXAMPLE OF A NORMAL REACTION TYPE.

    --------+----------------+--------------------------+----------------
            |   Reaction     |                          |
    Stimulus|     Time.      |                          |
      word. |Unit 0·2 second.|        Reaction.         |  Reproduction.
    --------+----------------+--------------------------+----------------
    head    |       9        |      foot                |part of the body
    green   |      11        |      blouse              |
    water   |      14        |      clear               |light
    to sing |       6        |      children            |
    dead    |      11        |      do not like         |
    long    |       6        |      short               |I, tall
    ship    |       7        |      forth               |
    to pay  |       9        |      bills               |
    window  |       9        |      room                |
    friendly|      10        |      children            |
    table   |       9        |      chair               |room
    to ask  |      10        |      all kinds           |
    cold    |       7        |      warm                |
    stem    |       6        |      flower              |
    to dance|       9        |      I . .               |like
    lake    |       8        |      Zürich              |
    sick    |       8        |      sister              |
    pride   |       6        |      people              |
    to cook |       7        |      woman               |
    ink     |       5        |      black               |
    angry   |      10        |      children            |people
    needle  |       9        |      to prick            |
    to swim |      10        |      healthy             |
    voyage  |       9        |      England             |
    blue    |      10        |      pretty              |like
    lamp    |       6        |      light               |
    to sin  |       8        |      much                |people
    bread   |      10        |      good                |like, necessary
    rich    |       9        |      nice                |
    tree    |       6        |      green               |
    to prick|       9        |      need                |
    --------+----------------+--------------------------+----------------

II.--AN EXAMPLE OF AN HYSTERICAL REACTION TYPE.

    --------+----------------+--------------------------+----------------
            |   Reaction     |                          |
    Stimulus|     Time.      |                          |
      word. |Unit 0·2 second.|       Reaction.          |  Reproduction.
    --------+----------------+--------------------------+----------------
    needle  |       7        | to sew                   |
    to swim |       9        | water                    |ship [127]
    [128]   |                |                          |
    voyage  |      35        | to ride, motion, voyager |
    blue    |      10        | colour                   |
    lamp    |       7        | to burn                  |
    --------+----------------+--------------------------+----------------
    to sin  |      22        |this idea is totally      |
            |                |  strange to me, I do not |
            |                |  recognize it            |
    bread   |      10        |to eat                    |
   rich[129]|      50        |money, I don't know       |possession
    brown   |       6        |nature                    |green
    to prick|       9        |needle                    |
    pity    |      12        |feeling                   |
    yellow  |       9        |colour                    |
    mountain|       8        |high                      |
    to die  |       8        |to perish                 |
    salt    |      15        |salty (laughs) I don't    |
            |                |  know                    |NaCl
    new     |      15        |old                       |as an opposite
    custom  |      10        |good                      |barbaric
    to pray |      12        |Deity                     |
    money   |      10        |wealth                    |
    foolish |      12        |narrow minded, restricted | ?
    pamphlet|      10        |paper                     |
    despise |      30        |that is a complicated, too| ?
            |                |  foolish                 |
    finger  |       8        |hand, not only hand, but  |
            |                |  also foot, a joint,     |
            |                |  member, extremity       |
    dear    |      14        |to pay (laughs)           |
    bird    |       8        |to fly                    |
    to fall |      30        |_tomber_, I will say no   | ?
            |                |  more, what do you       |
            |                |  mean by fall?           |
    book    |       6        |to read                   |
    unjust  |       8        |just                      |
    frog    |      11        |quack                     |
    to part |      30        |what does that mean?      | ?
    hunger  |      10        |to eat                    |
    white   |      12        |colour, everything        |
            |                |  possible, light         |
    child   |      10        |little, I did not hear    | ?
            |                |  well, _bébé_            |
    to take |                |                          |
      care  |      14        |attention                 |
    lead    |                |to draw, everything       |
      pencil|       8        |  possible can be drawn   |
    sad     |       9        |to weep, that is not      |to be
            |                |  always the case         |
    plum    |      16        |to eat a plum, pluck what |fruit
            |                |  do you mean by it? Is   |
            |                |  that symbolic?          |
    to marry|      27        |how can you? reunion,     |union, alliance
            |                |  union                   |
    --------+----------------+--------------------------+----------------

The following diagrams illustrate the reaction times in an association
experiment in four normal test-persons. The height of each column
denotes the length of the reaction time.

[Illustration: FIG. 4.]

[Illustration: FIG. 5.]

[Illustration: FIG. 6.]

[Illustration: FIG. 7.]

The succeeding diagram shows the course of the reaction time in
hysterical individuals. The light cross-hatched columns denote the
places where the test-person was unable to react (so-called failures to
react).

[Illustration: FIG. 8.]

[Illustration: FIG. 9.]

[Illustration: FIG. 10.]

The first thing that strikes us is the fact that many test-persons
show a marked prolongation of the reaction time. This would seem to
be suggestive of intellectual difficulties,--wrongly however, for we
are often dealing with very intelligent persons of fluent speech. The
explanation lies rather in the emotions. In order to understand the
matter, comprehensively, we must bear in mind that the association
experiments cannot deal with a separated psychic function, for any
psychic occurrence is never a thing in itself, but is always the
resultant of the entire psychological past. The association experiment,
too, is not merely a method for the reproduction of separated word
couplets, but it is a kind of pastime, a conversation between
experimenter and test-person. In a certain sense it is still more
than that. Words really represent condensed actions, situations, and
things. When I give a stimulus word to the test-person, which denotes
an action, it is as if I represented to him the action itself, and
asked him, "How do you behave towards it? What do you think of it?
What would you do in this situation?" If I were a magician, I should
cause the situation corresponding to the stimulus word to appear in
reality, and placing the test-person in its midst, I should then study
his manner of reaction. The result of my stimulus words would thus
undoubtedly approach infinitely nearer perfection. But as we are not
magicians, we must be contented with the linguistic substitutes for
reality; at the same time we must not forget that the stimulus word
will almost without exception conjure up its corresponding situation.
All depends on how the test-person reacts to this situation. The word
"bride" or "bridegroom" will not evoke a simple reaction in a young
lady; but the reaction will be deeply influenced by the strong feeling
tones evoked, the more so if the experimenter be a man. It thus happens
that the test-person is often unable to react quickly and smoothly
to all stimulus words. There are certain stimulus words which denote
actions, situations, or things, about which the test-person cannot think
quickly and surely, and this fact is demonstrated in the association
experiments. The examples which I have just given show an abundance of
long reaction times and other disturbances. In this case the reaction
to the stimulus word is in some way impeded, that is, the adaptation to
the stimulus word is disturbed. The stimulus words therefore act upon us
just as reality acts; indeed, a person who shows such great disturbances
to the stimulus words, is in a certain sense but imperfectly adapted to
reality. Disease itself is an imperfect adaptation; hence in this case
we are dealing with something morbid in the psyche,--with something
which is either temporarily or persistently pathological in character,
that is, we are dealing with a psychoneurosis, with a functional
disturbance of the mind. This rule, however, as we shall see later, is
not without its exceptions.

Let us, in the first place, continue the discussion concerning the
prolonged reaction time. It often happens that the test-person actually
does _not_ know what to answer to the stimulus word. He waives any
reaction, and for the moment he totally fails to obey the original
instructions, and shows himself incapable of adapting himself to the
experimenter. If this phenomenon occurs frequently in an experiment,
it signifies a high degree of disturbance in adjustment. I would
call attention to the fact that it is quite indifferent what reason
the test-person gives for the refusal. Some find that too many ideas
suddenly occur to them; others, that they suffer from a deficiency of
ideas. In most cases, however, the difficulties first perceived are so
deterrent that they actually give up the whole reaction. The following
example shows a case of hysteria with many failures of reaction:--

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
      Stimulus     | Reaction Time. |                      |
        word.      |Unit 0·2 second.|       Reaction.      | Reproduction.
    ---------------+----------------+----------------------+--------------
    to sing        |       9        | nice                 |     +[130]
    dead           |      15        | awful                |     ?
    long[131]      |      40        | the time, the journey|     ?
    ship[132]      |                |                      |     +
    to pay         |      11        | money                |
    window         |      10        | big                  |     high
    friendly       |      50        | a man                |     human
    to cook        |      10        | soup                 |     +
    ink            |      9         | black or blue        |     +
    angry          |                |                      |     bad
    needle         |       9        | to sew               |     +
    lamp           |      14        | light                |     +
    to sin         |                |                      |
    bread          |      15        | to eat               |     +
    rich[133][134] |      40        | good, convenient     |     +
    yellow         |      18        | paper                |     colour
    mountain       |      10        | high                 |     +
    to die         |      15        | awful                |     +
    salt[135]      |      25        | salty                |     +
    new            |                |                      |   good, nice
    custom[136]    |                |                      |
    to pray        |                |                      |
    money[137]     |      35        | to buy, one is able  |     +
    pamphlet       |      16        | to write             |     +
    to despise[138]|      22        | people               |     +
    finger         |                |                      |
    dear           |      12        | thing                |     +
    bird           |      12        | sings or flies       |     +
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------

In example II. we find a characteristic phenomenon. The test-person
is not content with the requirements of the instruction, that is, she
is not satisfied with _one_ word, but reacts with many words. She
apparently does more and better than the instruction requires, but in
so doing she does not fulfil the requirements of the instruction. Thus
she reacts:--custom--good--barbaric; foolish--narrow minded--restricted;
family--big--small--everything possible.

These examples show in the first place that many other words connect
themselves with the reaction word. The test person is unable to suppress
the ideas which subsequently occur to her. She also pursues a certain
tendency which perhaps is more exactly expressed in the following
reaction: new--old--as an opposite. The addition of "as an opposite"
denotes that the test-person has the desire to add something explanatory
or supplementary. This tendency is also shown in the following reaction:
finger--not only hand, also foot--a limb--member--extremity.

Here we have a whole series of supplements. It seems as if the reaction
were not sufficient for the test-person, something else must always
be added, as if what has already been said were incorrect or in some
way imperfect. This feeling is what Janet designates the "_sentiment
d'incomplétude_," but this by no means explains everything. I go
somewhat deeply into this phenomenon because it is very frequently met
with in neurotic individuals. It is not merely a small and unimportant
subsidiary manifestation demonstrable in an insignificant experiment,
but rather an elemental and universal manifestation which plays a _rôle_
in other ways in the psychic life of neurotics.

By his desire to supplement, the test-person betrays a tendency to give
the experimenter more than he wants, he actually makes great efforts to
find further mental occurrences in order finally to discover something
quite satisfactory. If we translate this observation into the psychology
of everyday life, it signifies that the test-person has a constant
tendency to give to others more feeling than is required and expected.
According to Freud, this is a sign of a reinforced object-libido, that
is, it is a compensation for an inner want of satisfaction and voidness
of feeling. This elementary observation therefore displays one of the
characteristics of hysterics, namely, the tendency to allow themselves
to be carried away by everything, to attach themselves enthusiastically
to everything, and always to promise too much and hence perform too
little. Patients with this symptom are, in my experience, always hard
to deal with; at first they are enthusiastically enamoured of the
physician, for a time going so far as to accept everything he says
blindly; but they soon merge into an equally blind resistance against
him, thus rendering any educative influence absolutely impossible.

We see therefore in this type of reaction an expression of a tendency to
give more than is asked or expected. This tendency betrays itself also
in other failures to follow the instruction:--

    to quarrel--angry--different things--I always quarrel at home;
    to marry--how can you marry?--reunion--union;
    plum--to eat--to pluck--what do you mean by it?--is it symbolic?
    to sin--this idea is quite strange to me, I do not recognise it.

These reactions show that the test-person gets away altogether from the
situation of the experiment. For the instruction was, that he should
answer only with the first word which occurs to him. But here we note
that the stimulus words act with excessive strength, that they are taken
as if they were direct personal questions. The test-person entirely
forgets that we deal with mere words which stand in print before us, but
finds a personal meaning in them; he tries to divine their intention and
defend himself against them, thus altogether forgetting the original
instructions.

This elementary observation discloses another common peculiarity of
hysterics, namely, that of taking everything personally, of never being
able to remain objective, and of allowing themselves to be carried away
by momentary impressions; this again shows the characteristics of the
enhanced object-libido.

Yet another sign of impeded adaptation is the often occurring
_repetition of the stimulus words_. The test-persons repeat the stimulus
word as if they had not heard or understood it distinctly. They repeat
it just as we repeat a difficult question in order to grasp it better
before answering. This same tendency is shown in the experiment. The
questions are repeated because the stimulus words act on hysterical
individuals in much the same way as difficult personal questions. In
principle it is the same phenomenon as the subsequent completion of the
reaction.

In many experiments we observe that the same reaction constantly
reappears to the most varied stimulus words. These words seem to possess
a special reproduction tendency, and it is very interesting to examine
their relationship to the test-person. For example, I have observed a
case in which the patient repeated the word "short" a great many times
and often in places where it had no meaning. The test-person could not
directly state the reason for the repetition of the word "short." From
experience I knew that such predicates always relate either to the
test-person himself or to the person nearest to him. I assumed that
in this word "short" he designated himself, and that in this way he
helped to express something very painful to him. The test-person is
of very small stature. He is the youngest of four brothers, who, in
contrast to himself, are all tall. He was always the "_child_" in the
family; he was nicknamed "Short" and was treated by all as the "little
one." This resulted in a total loss of self-confidence. Although he was
intelligent, and despite long study, he could not decide to present
himself for examination; he finally became impotent, and merged into a
psychosis in which, whenever he was alone, he took delight in walking
about in his room on his toes in order to appear taller. The word
"short," therefore, stood to him for a great many painful experiences.
This is usually the case with the perseverated words; they always
contain something of importance for the individual psychology of the
test-person.

The signs thus far discussed are not found spread about in an arbitrary
way through the whole experiment, but are seen in very definite places,
namely, where the stimulus words strike against emotionally accentuated
complexes. This observation is the foundation of the so-called
"diagnosis of facts" (_Tatbestandsdiagnostik_). This method is employed
to discover, by means of an association experiment, which is the culprit
among a number of persons suspected of a crime. That this is possible I
will demonstrate by the brief recital of a concrete case.

On the 6th of February, 1908, our supervisor reported to me that a
nurse complained to her of having been robbed during the forenoon of
the previous day. The facts were as follows: The nurse kept her money,
amounting to 70 francs, in a pocket-book which she had placed in her
cupboard where she also kept her clothes. The cupboard contained two
compartments, of which one belonged to the nurse who was robbed, and the
other to the head nurse. These two nurses and a third one, who was an
intimate friend of the head nurse, slept in the room where the cupboard
was. This room was in a section which was occupied in common by six
nurses who had at all times free access to the room. Given such a state
of affairs it is not to be wondered that the supervisor shrugged her
shoulders when I asked her whom she most suspected.

Further investigation showed that on the day of the theft, the
above-mentioned friend of the head nurse was slightly indisposed and
remained the whole morning in the room in bed. Hence, unless she herself
was the thief, the theft could have taken place only in the afternoon.
Of four other nurses upon whom suspicion could possibly fall, there was
one who attended regularly to the cleaning of the room in question,
while the remaining three had nothing to do in it, nor was it shown that
any of them had spent any time there on the previous day.

It was therefore natural that the last three nurses should be regarded
for the time being as less implicated, so I began by subjecting the
first three to the experiment.

From the information I had obtained of the case, I knew that the
cupboard was locked but that the key was kept near by in a very
conspicuous place, that on opening the cupboard the first thing which
would strike the eye was a fur boa, and, moreover, that the pocket-book
was between some linen in an inconspicuous place. The pocket-book was of
dark reddish leather, and contained the following objects: a 50-franc
banknote, a 20-franc piece, some centimes, a small silver watch-chain, a
stencil used in the lunatic asylum to mark the kitchen utensils, and a
small receipt from Dosenbach's shoeshop in Zürich.

Besides the plaintiff, only the head nurse knew the exact particulars
of the deed, for as soon as the former missed her money she immediately
asked the head nurse to help her find it, thus the head nurse had
been able to learn the smallest details, which naturally rendered the
experiment still more difficult, for she was precisely the one most
suspected. The conditions for the experiment were better for the others,
since they knew nothing concerning the particulars of the deed, and
some not even that a theft had been committed. As critical stimulus
words I selected the name of the robbed nurse, plus the following words:
cupboard, door, open, key, yesterday, banknote, gold, 70, 50, 20, money,
watch, pocket-book, chain, silver, to hide, fur, dark reddish, leather,
centimes, stencil, receipt, Dosenbach. Besides these words which
referred directly to the deed, I took also the following, which had a
special effective value: theft, to take, to steal, suspicion, blame,
court, police, to lie, to fear, to discover, to arrest, innocent.

The objection is often made to the last species of words that they
may produce a strong affective resentment even in innocent persons,
and for that reason one cannot attribute to them any comparative
value. Nevertheless, it may always be questioned whether the affective
resentment of an innocent person will have the same effect on the
association as that of a guilty one, and that question can only
be authoritatively answered by experience. Until the contrary is
demonstrated, I maintain that words of the above-mentioned type may
profitably be used.

I distributed these critical words among twice as many indifferent
stimulus words in such a manner that each critical word was followed by
two indifferent ones. As a rule it is well to follow up the critical
words by indifferent words in order that the action of the first may be
clearly distinguished. But one may also follow up one critical word by
another, especially if one wishes to bring into relief the action of the
second. Thus I placed together "darkish red" and "leather," and "chain"
and "silver."

After this preparatory work I undertook the experiment with the three
above-mentioned nurses. Following the order of the experiment, I shall
denote the friend of the head nurse by the letter A, the head nurse
by B, and the nurse who attended to the cleaning of the room by C. As
examinations of this kind can be rendered into a foreign tongue only
with the greatest difficulty, I will content myself with presenting the
general results, and with giving some examples. I first undertook the
experiment with A, and judging by the circumstances she appeared only
slightly moved. B was next examined; she showed marked excitement, her
pulse being 120 per minute immediately after the experiment. The last to
be examined was C. She was the most tranquil of the three; she displayed
but little embarrassment, and only in the course of the experiment
did it occur to her that she was suspected of stealing, a fact which
manifestly disturbed her towards the end of the experiment.

The general impression from the examination spoke strongly against the
head nurse B. It seemed to me that she evinced a very "suspicious," or
I might almost say, "impudent" countenance. With the definite idea of
finding in her the guilty one I set about adding up the results. You
will see that I was wrong in my surmise and that the test proved my
error.

One can make use of many special methods of computing, but they are
not all equally good and equally exact. (One must always resort to
calculation, as appearances are enormously deceptive.) The method
which is most to be recommended is that of the probable average of the
reaction time. It shows at a glance the difficulties which the person in
the experiment had to overcome in the reaction.

The technique of this calculation is very simple. The probable average
is the middle number of the various reaction times arranged in a series.
The reaction times are, for example,[139] placed in the following
manner: 5, 5, 5, 7, 7, 7, 7, 8, 9, 9, 9, 12, 13, 14. The number found in
the middle (8) is the probable average of this series.

The probable averages of the reaction are:

     A     B     C
    10·0  12·0  13·5.

No conclusions can be drawn from this result. But the average
reaction times calculated separately for the indifferent reactions,
for the critical, and for those immediately following the critical
(post-critical) are more interesting.

From this example we see that whereas A has the shortest reaction time
for the indifferent reactions, she shows in comparison to the other two
persons of the experiment, the longest time for the critical reactions.

THE PROBABLE AVERAGE OF THE REACTION TIME.

    ---------------------------------------------
             for            |  A   |  B   |  C
    ------------------------+------+------+------
    Indifferent reactions   | 10·0 | 11·0 | 12·0
    Critical reactions      | 16·0 | 13·0 | 15·0
    Post-critical reactions | 10·0 | 11·0 | 13·0
    ---------------------------------------------

The difference between the reaction times, let us say between the
indifferent and the critical, is 6 for A, 2 for B, and 3 for C, that is,
it is more than double for A when compared with the other two persons.

In the same way we can calculate how many complex indicators there are
on an average for the indifferent, critical, etc., reactions.

THE AVERAGE COMPLEX-INDICATORS FOR EACH REACTION.

    ---------------------------------------------
             for            |  A   |  B   |  C
    ------------------------+------+------+------
    Indifferent reactions   |  0·6 |  0·9 | 0·8
    Critical reactions      |  1·3 |  0·9 | 1·2
    Post-critical reactions |  0·6 |  1·0 | 0·8
    ---------------------------------------------

The difference between the indifferent and critical reactions for A =
0·7, for B = 0, for C = 0·4. A is again the highest.

Another question to consider is, the proportion of imperfect reactions
in each case.

The result for A = 34%, for B = 28%, and for C = 30%.

Here, too, A reaches the highest value, and in this, I believe, we see
the characteristic moment of the guilt-complex in A. I am, however,
unable to explain here circumstantially the reasons why I maintain that
memory errors are related to an emotional complex, as this would lead me
beyond the limits of the present work. I therefore refer the reader to
my work "_Ueber die Reproductionsstörrungen im Associationsexperiment_"
(IX Beitrag der Diagnost. Associat. Studien).[140]

As it often happens that an association of strong feeling tone produces
in the experiment a perseveration, with the result that not only the
critical association, but also two or three successive associations are
imperfectly reproduced, it will be very interesting to see how many
imperfect reproductions are so arranged in the series in our cases.
The result of computation shows that the imperfect reproductions thus
arranged in series are for A 64·7%, for B 55·5%, and for C 30·0%.

Again we find that A has the greatest percentage. To be sure, this
may partially depend on the fact that A also possesses the greatest
number of imperfect reproductions. Given a small number of reactions,
it is usual that the greater the total number of the same, the more the
imperfect reactions will occur in groups. But this cannot account for
the high proportion in our case, where, on the other hand, B and C have
not a much smaller number of imperfect reactions when compared to A. It
is significant that C with her slight emotions during the experiment
shows the minimum of imperfect reproductions arranged in series.

As imperfect reproductions are also complex indicators, it is necessary
to see how they distribute themselves in respect to the indifferent,
critical, etc., reactions.

It is hardly necessary to bring into prominence the differences between
the indifferent and the critical reactions of the various subjects as
shown by the resulting numbers of the table. In this respect, too, A
occupies first place.

IMPERFECT REPRODUCTIONS WHICH OCCUR.

    ----------------------------------------
              in            |  A |  B |  C
    ------------------------+----+----+-----
    Indifferent reactions   | 10 | 12 | 11
    Critical reactions      | 19 |  9 | 12
    Post-critical reactions |  5 |  7 |  7
    ----------------------------------------

Naturally, here, too, there is a probability that the greater the
number of the imperfect reproductions the greater is their number in
the critical reactions. If we suppose that the imperfect reproductions
are distributed regularly and without choice, among all the reactions,
there will be a greater number of them for A (in comparison with B and
C) even as reactions to critical words, since A has the greater number
of imperfect reproductions. Admitting such a uniform distribution of the
imperfect reproductions, it is easy to calculate how many we ought to
expect to belong to each individual kind of reaction.

From this calculation it appears that the disturbances of reproductions
which concern the critical reactions for A greatly surpass the number
expected, for C they are 0·9 higher, while for B they are lower.

IMPERFECT REPRODUCTIONS.

    ----------------------------------------------
           Which may be expected                 |
    ---------------------------------------------+
       | Indifferent |  Critical | Post-critical |
    For|  Reactions. | Reactions.|  Reactions.   |
    ---+-------------+-----------+---------------+
     A |     11·2    |    12·5   |     10·2      |
     B |      9·2    |    10·3   |      8·4      |
     C |      9·9    |    11·1   |      9·0      |
    ----------------------------------------------

       -------------------------------------------
       |           Which really occur
       --------------+----------------------------
       | Indifferent | Critical   | Post-critical
    For| Reactions.  | Reactions. |  Reactions.
       --------------+------------+---------------
     A |    10       |    19      |      5
     B |    12       |     9      |      7
     C |    11       |    12      |      7
       -------------------------------------------

All this points to the fact that in the subject A the critical stimulus
words acted with the greatest intensity, and hence the greatest
suspicion falls on A. Practically relying on the test one may assume the
probability of this person's guilt. The same evening A made a complete
confession of the theft, and thus the success of the experiment was
confirmed.

Such a result is undoubtedly of scientific interest and worthy of
serious consideration. There is much in experimental psychology which
is of less use than the material exemplified in this test. Putting the
theoretical interest altogether aside, we have here something that is
not to be despised from a practical point of view, to wit, a culprit
has been brought to light in a much easier and shorter way than is
customary. What has been possible once or twice ought to be possible
again, and it is well worth while to investigate some means of rendering
the method increasingly capable of rapid and sure results.

This application of the experiment shows that it is possible to strike
a concealed, indeed an unconscious complex by means of a stimulus word;
and conversely we may assume with great certainty that behind a reaction
which shows a complex indicator there is a hidden complex, even though
the test-person strongly denies it. One must get rid of the idea that
educated and intelligent test-persons are able to see and admit their
own complexes. Every human mind contains much that is unacknowledged
and hence unconscious as such; and no one can boast that he stands
completely above his complexes. Those who persist in maintaining that
they can, are not aware of the spectacles upon their noses.

It has long been thought that the association experiment enables one
to distinguish certain _intellectual_ types. That is not the case. The
experiment does not give us any particular insight into the purely
intellectual, but rather into the emotional processes. To be sure we
can erect certain types of reaction; they are not, however, based on
intellectual peculiarities, but depend entirely on the _proportionate
emotional states_. Educated test-persons usually show superficial and
linguistically deep-rooted associations, whereas the uneducated form
more valuable associations and often of ingenious significance. This
behaviour would be paradoxical from an intellectual view-point. The
meaningful associations of the uneducated are not really the product of
intellectual thinking, but are simply the results of a special emotional
state. The whole thing is more important to the uneducated, his
emotion is greater, and for that reason he pays more attention to the
experiment than the educated person, and his associations are therefore
more significant. Apart from those determined by education, we have to
consider three principal individual types:

1. An objective type with undisturbed reactions.

2. A so-called complex-type with many disturbances in the experiment
occasioned by the constellation of a complex.

3. A so-called definition-type. The peculiarity of this type consists in
the fact that the reaction always gives an explanation or a definition
of the content of the stimulus word; _e.g._:

    apple,--a tree-fruit;
    table,--a piece of household furniture;
    to promenade,--an activity;
    father,--chief of the family.

This type is chiefly found in stupid persons, and it is therefore quite
usual in imbecility. But it can also be found in persons who are not
really stupid, but who do not wish _to be taken as stupid_. Thus a young
student from whom associations were taken by an older intelligent woman
student reacted altogether with definitions. The test-person was of
the opinion that it was an examination in intelligence, and therefore
directed most of his attention to the significance of the stimulus
words; his associations, therefore, looked like those of an idiot. All
idiots, however, do not react with definitions; probably only those
react in this way who would like to appear smarter than they are, that
is, those to whom their stupidity is painful. I call this widespread
complex the "intelligence-complex." A normal test-person reacts in a
most overdrawn manner as follows:

    anxiety--heart anguish;
    to kiss--love's unfolding;
    to kiss--perception of friendship.

This type gives a constrained and unnatural impression. The test-persons
wish to be more than they are, they wish to exert more influence than
they really have. Hence we see that persons with an intelligence-complex
are usually unnatural and constrained; that they are always somewhat
stilted, or flowery; they show a predilection for complicated foreign
words, high-sounding quotations, and other intellectual ornaments.
In this way they wish to influence their fellow-beings, they wish
to impress others with their apparent education and intelligence,
and thus to compensate for their painful feeling of stupidity. The
definition-type is closely related to the predicate-type, or, to express
it more precisely, to the predicate-type expressing personal judgment
(_Wertprädikattypus_). For example:

    flower--pretty;
    money--convenient;
    animal--ugly;
    knife--dangerous;
    death--ghastly.

In the definition type the _intellectual_ significance of the stimulus
word is rendered prominent, but in the predicate type its _emotional_
significance. There are predicate-types which show great exaggeration
where reactions such as the following appear:

    piano--horrible;
    to sing--heavenly;
    mother--ardently loved;
    father--something good, nice, holy.

In the definition-type an absolutely _intellectual_ make-up is
manifested or rather simulated, but here there is a very _emotional_
one. Yet, just as the definition-type really conceals a lack of
intelligence, so the excessive _emotional_ expression conceals or
overcompensates an emotional deficiency. This conclusion is very
interestingly illustrated by the following discovery:--On investigating
the influence of the familiar milieus on the association-type it was
found that young people seldom possess a predicate-type, but that, on
the other hand, the predicate-type increases in frequency with advancing
age. In women the increase of the predicate-type begins a little after
the 40th year, and in men after the 60th. That is the precise time when,
owing to the deficiency of sexuality, there actually occurs considerable
emotional loss. If a test-person evinces a distinct predicate-type, it
may always be inferred that a marked internal emotional deficiency is
thereby compensated. Still, one cannot reason conversely, namely, that
an inner emotional deficiency must produce a predicate-type, no more
than that idiocy directly produces a definition-type. A predicate-type
can also betray itself through the external behaviour, as, for example,
through a particular affectation, enthusiastic exclamations, an
embellished behaviour, and the constrained sounding language so often
observed in society.

The complex-type shows no particular tendency except the _concealment_
of a complex, whereas the definition and predicate types betray a
positive tendency to exert in some way a _definite_ influence on the
experimenter. But whereas the definition-type tends to bring to light
its intelligence, the predicate-type displays its emotion. I need hardly
add of what importance such determinations are for the diagnosis of
character.

After finishing an association experiment I usually add another of a
different kind, the so-called _reproduction_ experiment. I repeat the
same stimulus words and ask the test-persons whether they still remember
their former reactions. In many instances the memory fails, and as
experience shows, these locations are stimulus words which touched an
emotionally accentuated complex, or stimulus words immediately following
such critical words.

This phenomenon has been designated as paradoxical and contrary to all
experience. For it is known that emotionally accentuated things are
better retained in memory than indifferent things. This is quite true,
but it does not hold for the _linguistic_ expression of an emotionally
accentuated content. On the contrary, one very easily forgets what he
has said under emotion, one is even apt to contradict himself about
it. Indeed, the efficacy of cross-examinations in court depends on
this fact. The reproduction method therefore serves to render still
more prominent the complex stimulus. In normal persons we usually find
a limited number of false reproductions, seldom more than 19-20 per
cent., while in abnormal persons, especially in hysterics, we often
find from 20-40 per cent. of false reproductions. The reproduction
certainty is therefore in certain cases a measure for the emotivity of
the test-person.

By far the larger number of neurotics show a pronounced tendency to
cover up their intimate affairs in impenetrable darkness, even from the
doctor, so that he finds it very difficult to form a proper picture
of the patient's psychology. In such cases I am greatly assisted by
the association experiment. When the experiment is finished, I first
look over the general course of the reaction times. I see a great many
very prolonged intervals; this means that the patient can only adjust
himself with difficulty, that his psychological functions proceed with
marked internal frictions with _resistances_. The greater number of
neurotics react only under great and very definite resistances; there
are, however, others in whom the average reaction times are as short as
in the normal, and in whom the other complex indicators are lacking,
but, despite that fact, they undoubtedly present neurotic symptoms.
These rare cases are especially found among very intelligent and
educated persons, chronic patients who, after many years of practice,
have learned to control their outward behaviour and therefore outwardly
display very little if any trace of their neuroses. The superficial
observer would take them for normal, yet in some places they show
disturbances which betray the repressed complex.

After examining the reaction times I turn my attention to the type of
the association to ascertain with what type I am dealing. If it is a
predicate-type I draw the conclusions which I have detailed above; if it
is a complex type I try to ascertain the nature of the complex. With the
necessary experience one can readily emancipate one's judgment from the
test-person's statements and almost without any previous knowledge of
the test-persons it is possible under certain circumstances to read the
most intimate complexes from the results of the experiment. I look at
first for the reproduction words and put them together, and then I look
for the stimulus words which show the greatest disturbances. In many
cases merely assorting these words suffices to unearth the complex. In
some cases it is necessary to put a question here and there. The matter
is well illustrated by the following concrete example:

It concerns an educated woman of 30 years of age, married three years
previously. Since her marriage she has suffered from episodic excitement
in which she is violently jealous of her husband. The marriage is a
happy one in every other respect, and it should be noted that the
husband gives no cause for the jealousy. The patient is sure that she
loves him and that her excited states are groundless. She cannot imagine
whence these excited states originate, and feels quite perplexed over
them. It is to be noted that she is a catholic and has been brought
up religiously, while her husband is a protestant. This difference of
religion did not admittedly play any part. A more thorough anamnesis
showed the existence of an extreme prudishness. Thus, for example, no
one was allowed to talk in the patient's presence about her sister's
childbirth, because the sexual moment suggested therein caused her the
greatest excitement. She always undressed in the adjoining room and
never in her husband's presence, etc. At the age of 27 she was supposed
to have had no idea how children were born. The associations gave the
results shown in the accompanying chart.

The stimulus words characterised by marked disturbances are the
following: yellow, to pray, to separate, to marry, to quarrel, old,
family, happiness, false, fear, to kiss, bride, to choose, contented.
The strongest disturbances are found in the following stimulus words:
_to pray_, _to marry_, _happiness_, _false_, _fear_, and _contented_.
These words, therefore, more than any others, seem to strike the
complex. The conclusions that can be drawn from this is that she is not
indifferent to the fact that her husband is a protestant, that she again
thinks of praying, believes there is something wrong with marriage,
that she is false, entertains fancies of faithlessness, is afraid (of
the husband? of the future?), she is not contented with her choice
(to choose) and she thinks of separation. The patient therefore has a
separation complex, for she is very discontented with her married life.
When I told her this result she was affected and at first attempted to
deny it, then to mince over it, but finally she admitted everything
I said and added more. She reproduced a large number of fancies of
faithlessness, reproaches against her husband, etc. _Her prudishness
and jealousy were merely a projection of her own sexual wishes on her
husband._ Because she was faithless in her fancies and did not admit it
to herself she was jealous of her husband.

[Illustration: For the stimulus words corresponding to the numbers, see
the list on pages 94 and 95.

The blue columns represent failures of reproductions, the green ones
represent repetitions of stimulus words, and the yellow columns show
those associations in which the patient either laughed or made mistakes,
using many words instead of one. The height of the columns represent the
length of the reaction time.

[_To face p. 118._]
]

It is impossible in a lecture to give a review of all the manifold
uses of the association experiment. I must content myself with having
demonstrated to you a few of its chief uses.

LECTURE II

THE FAMILIAL CONSTELLATIONS

Ladies and Gentlemen: As you have seen, there are manifold ways in which
the association experiment may be employed in practical psychology. I
should like to speak to you to-day about another use of this experiment
which is primarily of theoretical significance. My pupil, Miss Fürst,
M.D., made the following researches: she applied the association
experiment to 24 families, consisting altogether of 100 test-persons;
the resulting material amounted to 22,200 associations. This material
was elaborated in the following manner: Fifteen separate groups were
formed according to logical-linguistic standards, and the associations
were arranged as follows:

                                          Husband    Wife    Difference

      I. Co-ordination                      6·5       0·5        6
     II. Sub and supraordination            7         --         7
    III. Contrast                           --        --        --
     IV. Predicate expressing a personal
           judgment                         8·5      95·0       86·5
       V. Simple predicate                 21·0       3·5       17·5
      VI. Relations of the verb to the
            subject or complement          15·5       0·5       15·0
     VII. Designation of time, etc.        11·0        --       11·0
    VIII. Definition                       11·0        --       11·0
      IX. Coexistence                       1·5        --        1·5
       X. Identity                          0·5       0·5         --
      XI. Motor-speech combination         12·0        --       12·0
     XII. Composition of words               --        --         --
    XIII. Completion of words                --        --         --
     XIV. Clang associations                 --        --         --
      XV. Defective reactions                --        --         --
                                          -----     -----      -----
                          Total              --        --      173·5
                                          173·5
                      Average difference  ----- = 11·5
                                           15

As can be seen from this example, I utilise the difference to
demonstrate the degree of the analogy. In order to find a basis for the
sum of the resemblance I have calculated the differences among all Dr.
Fürst's test-persons, not related among themselves, by comparing every
female test-person with all the other unrelated females; the same has
been done for the male test-persons.

The most marked difference is found in those cases where the two
test-persons compared have no associative quality in common. All the
groups are calculated in percentages, the greatest difference possible
being 200/15 = 13·3 per cent.

I. The average difference of male unrelated test-persons is 5·9 per
cent., and that of females of the same group is 6 per cent.

II. The average difference between male related test-persons is 4·1 per
cent., and that between female related tests-persons is 3·8 per cent.
From these numbers we see that relatives show a tendency to agreement in
the reaction type.

    III. Difference between fathers and children = 4·2.
             "         "    mothers  "     "     = 3·5.

The reaction types of children come nearer to the type of the mother
than to the father.

    IV. Difference between fathers and their sons       = 3·1.
            "         "       "     "    "   daughters  = 4·9.
            "         "    mothers  "    "   sons       = 4·7.
            "         "       "     "    "   daughters  = 3·0.

[Illustration: FIG. 11.

Tracing A. ---- father; ..... mother; ++++ daughter.

I. Assoc. by co-ordination; II. sub and supraordination; III. contrast,
etc. (see previous page).]

    V. Difference between brothers = 4·7.
           "         "    sisters  = 5·1.

If the married sisters are omitted from the comparison we get the
following result:

Difference of unmarried sisters = 3·8. These observations show
distinctly that marriage destroys more or less the original agreement,
as the husband belongs to a different type.

Difference between unmarried brothers = 4·8.

Marriage seems to exert no influence on the association forms in men.
Nevertheless, the material which we have at our disposal is not as yet
enough to allow us to draw definite conclusions.

VI. Difference between husband and wife = 4·7.

[Illustration: FIG. 12.

Tracing B. ---- husband; ..... wife.]

This number sums up inadequately the different and very unequal values;
that is to say, there are some cases which show extreme difference and
some which show marked concordance.

The different results are shown in the tracings (Figs. 11-15).

In the tracings I have marked the number of associations of each quality
perpendicularly in percentages. The Roman letters written horizontally
represent the forms of association indicated in the above tables.

Tracing A. The father (black line) shows an objective type, while the
mother and daughter show the pure predicate type with a pronounced
subjective tendency.

Tracing B. The husband and wife agree well in the predicate objective
type, the predicate subjective being somewhat more numerous in the wife.

Tracing C. A very nice agreement between a father and his two daughters.

[Illustration: FIG. 13.

Tracing C. ---- father; ..... 1st daughter; ++++ 2nd daughter.]

Tracing D. Two sisters living together. The dotted line represents the
married sister.

[Illustration: FIG. 14.

Tracing D. ---- single sister; ..... married sister.]

Tracing E. Husband and wife. The wife is a sister of the two women of
tracing D. She approaches very closely to the type of her husband. Her
tracing is the direct opposite of that of her sisters.

[Illustration: FIG. 15.

Tracing E. ---- husband; ..... wife.]

The similarity of the associations is often very extraordinary. I will
reproduce here the associations of a mother and daughter.

     Stimulus Word.       Mother.            Daughter.

    to pay attention   diligent pupil      pupil
    law                command of God      Moses
    dear               child               father and mother
    great              God                 father
    potato             bulbous root        bulbous root
    family             many persons        5 persons
    strange            traveller           traveller
    brother            dear to me          dear
    to kiss            mother              mother
    burn               great pain          painful
    door               wide                big
    hay                dry                 dry
    month              many days           31 days
    air                cool                moist
    coal               sooty               black
    fruit              sweet               sweet
    merry              happy child         child

One might indeed think that in this experiment, where full scope is
given to chance, individuality would become a factor of the utmost
importance, and that therefore one might expect a very great diversity
and lawlessness of associations. But as we see the opposite is the
case. Thus the daughter lives contentedly in the same circle of ideas
as her mother, not only in her thought but in her form of expression;
indeed, she even uses the same words. What could be regarded as more
inconsequent, inconstant, and lawless than a fancy, a rapidly passing
thought? It is not lawless, however, neither is it free, but closely
determined within the limits of the milieu. If, therefore, even the
superficial and manifestly most inconsequent formations of the intellect
are altogether subject to the milieu-constellation, what must we not
expect for the more important conditions of the mind, for the emotions,
wishes, hopes, and intentions? Let us consider a concrete example,
illustrated by tracing A.

The mother is 45 years old and the daughter 16 years. Both have a very
distinct predicate-type expressing personal judgment, both differ from
the father in the most striking manner. The father is a drunkard and
a demoralised creature. We can thus readily understand that his wife
experiences an emotional voidness which she naturally betrays by her
enhanced predicate-type. The same causes cannot, however, operate in
the case of the daughter, for, in the first place, she is not married
to a drunkard, and, in the second, life with all its hopes and promises
still lies before her. It is distinctly unnatural for the daughter
to show an extreme predicate-type expressing personal judgment. She
responds to the stimuli of the environment just like her mother. But
whereas in the mother the type is in a way a natural consequence of her
unhappy condition of life, this condition is entirely lacking in the
daughter. The daughter simply imitates the mother; she merely appears
like the mother. Let us consider what this can signify for a young girl.
If a young girl reacts to the world like an old woman, disappointed
in life, this at once shows unnaturalness and constraint. But more
serious consequences are possible. As you know the predicate-type is a
manifestation of intensive emotions; the emotions are always involved.
Thus we cannot prevent ourselves from responding inwardly, at least,
to the feelings and passions of our immediate environment; we allow
ourselves to be infected and carried away by it. Originally the effects
and their physical manifestations had a biological significance; _i.e._
they were a protective mechanism for the individual and the whole
herd. If we manifest emotions, we can with certainty expect to receive
emotions in return. That is the feeling of the predicate-type. What the
45-year-old woman lacks in emotions, _i.e._ in love in her marriage
relations she seeks to obtain in the outside world, and for that reason
she is an ardent participant in the Christian Science movement. If
the daughter imitates this situation she copies her mother, she seeks
to obtain emotions from the outside. But for a girl of sixteen such
an emotional state is, to say the least, quite dangerous; like her
mother, she reacts to her environment as a sufferer soliciting sympathy.
Such an emotional state is no longer dangerous in the mother, but for
obvious reasons it is quite dangerous in the daughter. Once freed from
her father and mother she will be like her mother, _i.e._ she will be
a suffering woman craving for inner gratification. She will thus be
exposed to the great danger of falling a victim to brutality and of
marrying a brute and inebriate like her father.

This conception is of importance in the consideration of the influence
of environment and education. The example shows what passes over from
the mother to the child. It is not the good and pious precepts, nor
is it any other inculcation of pedagogic truths that have a moulding
influence upon the character of the developing child, but what most
influences him is the peculiarly affective state which is totally
unknown to his parents and educators. The concealed discord between
the parents, the secret worry, the repressed hidden wishes, all these
produce in the individual a certain affective state with its objective
signs which slowly but surely, though unconsciously, works its way
into the child's mind, producing therein the same conditions and hence
the same reactions to external stimuli. We know the depressing effect
mournful and melancholic persons have upon us. A restless and nervous
individual infects his surroundings with unrest and dissatisfaction,
a grumbler with his discontent, etc. Since grown-up persons are so
sensitive to surrounding influences, we should certainly expect this
to be even more noticeable among children, whose minds are as soft and
plastic as wax. The father and mother impress deeply into the child's
mind the seal of their personality; the more sensitive and mouldable the
child the deeper is the impression. Thus things that are never even
spoken about are reflected in the child. The child imitates the gesture,
and just as the gesture of the parent is the expression of an emotional
state, so in turn the gesture gradually produces in the child a similar
feeling, as it feels itself, so to speak, into the gesture. Just as the
parents adapt themselves to the world, so does the child. At the age
of puberty when it begins to free itself from the spell of the family,
it enters into life with, so to say, a surface adaptation entirely in
keeping with that of the father and mother. The frequent and often very
deep _depressions of puberty_ emanate from this; they are symptoms which
are rooted in the difficulty of new adjustment. The youthful person at
first tries to separate himself as much as possible from his family; he
may even estrange himself from it, but inwardly this only ties him the
more firmly to the parental image. I cite the case of a young neurotic
who ran away from his parents; he was estranged from, and almost hostile
to them, but he admitted to me that he possessed a special sanctum; it
was a strong box containing his old childhood books, old dried flowers,
stones, and even small bottles of water from the well at his home and
from a river along which he walked with his parents, etc.

The first attempts to assume friendship and love are constellated in
the strongest manner possible by the relation to parents, and here one
can usually observe how powerful are the influences of the familiar
constellations. It is not rare, for instance, for a healthy man whose
mother was hysterical to marry a hysteric, or for the daughter of an
alcoholic to choose an alcoholic for her husband. I was once consulted
by an intelligent and educated young woman of twenty-six who suffered
from a peculiar symptom. She thought that her eyes now and then took
on a strange expression which exerted a disagreeable influence on men.
If she then looked at a man he became self-conscious, turned away and
said something rapidly to his neighbour, at which both were either
embarrassed or inclined to laugh. The patient was convinced that her
look excited indecent thoughts in the men. It was impossible to convince
her of the falsity of her conviction. This symptom immediately aroused
in me the suspicion that I dealt with a case of paranoia rather than
with a neurosis. But as was shown only three days later by the further
course of the treatment, I was mistaken, for the symptom promptly
disappeared after it had been explained by analysis. It originated
in the following manner: The lady had a lover who deserted her in a
very marked manner. She felt utterly forsaken; she withdrew from all
society and pleasure, and entertained suicidal ideas. In her seclusion
there accumulated unadmitted and repressed erotic wishes which she
unconsciously projected on men whenever she was in their company.
This gave rise to the conviction that her look excited erotic wishes
in men. Further investigation showed that her deserting lover was a
lunatic, which she had not apparently observed. I expressed my surprise
at her unsuitable choice, and added that she must have had a certain
predilection for loving mentally abnormal persons. This she denied,
stating that she had once before been engaged to be married to a normal
man. He, too, deserted her; and on further investigation it was found
that he, too, had been in an insane asylum shortly before,--another
lunatic! This seemed to me to confirm with sufficient certainty my
belief that she had an unconscious tendency to choose insane persons.
Whence originated this strange taste? Her father was an eccentric
character, and in later years entirely estranged from his family. Her
whole love had therefore been turned away from her father to a brother
eight years her senior; him she loved and honoured as a father, and
this brother became hopelessly insane at the age of fourteen. That was
apparently the model from which the patient could never free herself,
after which she chose her lovers, and through which she had to become
unhappy. Her neurosis which gave the impression of insanity, probably
originated from this infantile model. We must take into consideration
that we are dealing in this case with a highly educated and intelligent
lady, who did not pass carelessly over her mental experiences, who
indeed reflected much over her unhappiness, without, however, having any
idea whence her misfortune originated.

There are things which unconsciously appear to us as a matter of course,
and it is for this reason that we do not see them truly, but attribute
everything to the so-called congenital character. I could cite any
number of examples of this kind. Every patient furnishes contributions
to this subject of the determination of destiny through the influence of
the familiar milieu. In every neurotic we see how the constellation of
the infantile milieu influences not only the character of the neurosis,
but also life's destiny, even in its minute details. The unhappy choice
of a profession, and innumerable matrimonial failures can be traced
to this constellation. There are, however, cases where the profession
has been well chosen, where the husband or wife leaves nothing to
be desired, and where still the person does not feel well but works
and lives under constant difficulties. Such cases often appear under
the guise of chronic neurasthenia. Here the difficulty is due to the
fact that the mind is unconsciously split into two parts of divergent
tendencies which are impeding each other; one part lives with the
husband or with the profession, while the other lives unconsciously in
the past with the father or mother. I have treated a lady who, after
suffering many years from a severe neurosis, merged into a dementia
præcox. The neurotic affection began with her marriage. This lady's
husband was kind, educated, well to do, and in every respect suitable
for her; his character showed nothing that would in any way interfere
with a happy marriage. The marriage was nevertheless unhappy, all
congenial companionship being excluded because the wife was neurotic.

The important heuristic axiom of every psychoanalysis reads as
follows: _If a person develops a neurosis this neurosis contains the
counter-argument against the relation of the patient to the individual
with whom he is most intimately connected._ A neurosis in the husband
loudly proclaims that he has intensive resistances and contrary
tendencies against his wife; if the wife has a neurosis she has a
tendency which diverges from her husband. If the person is unmarried
the neurosis is then directed against the lover or the sweetheart or
against the parents. Every neurotic naturally strives against this
relentless formulation of the content of his neurosis, and he often
refuses to recognise it at any cost, but still it is always justified.
To be sure, the conflict is not on the surface, but must generally be
revealed through a painstaking psychoanalysis.

The history of our patient reads as follows:

The father had a powerful personality. She was his favourite daughter,
and entertained for him a boundless veneration. At the age of seventeen
she for the first time fell in love with a young man. At that time she
twice dreamt the same dream, the impression of which never left her in
all her later years; she even imputed a mystic significance to it, and
often recalled it with religious dread. In the dream she saw a tall,
masculine figure with a very beautiful white beard; at this sight she
was permeated with a feeling of awe and delight as if she experienced
the presence of God Himself. This dream made the deepest impression
on her, and she was constrained to think of it again and again. The
love affair of that period proved to be one of little warmth, and was
soon given up. Later the patient married her present husband. Though
she loved her husband she was led continually to compare him with her
deceased father; this comparison always proved unfavourable to her
husband. Whatever the husband said, intended, or did, was subjected
to this standard and always with the same result: "My father would
have done all this better and differently." Our patient's life with
her husband was not happy, she could neither respect nor love him
sufficiently; she was inwardly dissatisfied. She gradually developed
a fervent piety, and at the same time violent hysterical symptoms
supervened. She began by going into raptures now over this and now over
that clergyman; she was looking everywhere for a spiritual friend, and
estranged herself more and more from her husband. The mental trouble
manifested itself about ten years after marriage. In her diseased state
she refused to have anything to do with her husband and child; she
imagined herself pregnant by another man. In brief, the resistances
against her husband, which hitherto had been laboriously repressed,
came out quite openly, and among other things manifested themselves in
insults of the gravest kind directed against him.

In this case we see how a neurosis appeared, as it were, at the moment
of marriage, _i.e. this neurosis expresses the counter-argument against
the husband_. What is the counter-argument? The counter-argument is
the father of the patient, for she verified her belief daily that her
husband was not the equal of her father. When the patient first fell in
love there had appeared a symptom in the form of an extremely impressive
dream or vision. She saw the man with the very beautiful white beard.
Who was this man? On directing her attention to the beautiful white
beard she immediately recognised the phantom. It was of course her
father. Thus every time the patient merged into a love affair the
picture of her father inopportunely appeared and prevented her from
adjusting herself psychologically to her husband.

I purposely chose this case as an illustration because it is simple,
obvious, and quite typical of many marriages which are crippled through
the neurosis of the wife. The cause of the unhappiness always lies in a
too firm attachment to the parents. The infantile relationship has not
been given up. We find here one of the most important tasks of pedagogy,
namely, the solution of the problem how to free the growing individual
from his unconscious attachments to the influences of the infantile
milieu, in such a manner that he may retain whatever there is in it that
is suitable and reject whatever is unsuitable. To solve this difficult
question on the part of the child seems to me impossible at present. We
know as yet too little about the child's emotional processes. The first
and only real contribution to the literature on this subject has in fact
appeared during the present year. It is the analysis of a five-year-old
boy published by Freud.

The difficulties on the part of the child are very great. They should
not, however, be so great on the part of the parents. In many ways
the parents could manage the love of children more carefully, more
indulgently, and more intelligently. The sins committed against
favourite children by the undue love of the parents could perhaps be
avoided through a wider knowledge of the child's mind. For many reasons
I find it impossible to say anything of general validity concerning the
bringing up of children as it is affected by this problem. We are as yet
very far from general prescriptions and rules; indeed we are still in
the realm of casuistry. Unfortunately, our knowledge of the finer mental
processes in the child is so meagre that we are not yet in any position
to say where the greatest trouble lies, whether in the parents, in the
child, or in the conception of the milieu. Only psychoanalyses of the
kind that Professor Freud has published in the _Jahrbuch_, 1909,[141]
will help us out of this difficulty. Such comprehensive and profound
observations should act as a strong inducement to all teachers to occupy
themselves with Freud's psychology. This psychology offers more values
for practical pedagogy than the physiological psychology of the present.

LECTURE III

EXPERIENCES CONCERNING THE PSYCHIC LIFE OF THE CHILD[142]

Ladies and Gentlemen: In our last lecture we saw how important the
emotional processes of childhood are for later life. In to-day's lecture
I should like to give you some insight into the psychic life of the
child through the analysis of a four-year-old girl. It is much to be
regretted that there are few among you who have had the opportunity
of reading the analysis of "Little Hans" (_Kleiner Hans_), which was
published by Freud during the current year.[143] I ought to begin by
giving you the content of that analysis, so that you might be in a
position to compare Freud's results with those obtained by me, and
observe the marked, and astonishing similarity between the unconscious
creations of the two children. Without a knowledge of the fundamental
analysis of Freud, much in the report of the following case will
appear strange, incomprehensible, and perhaps unacceptable to you. I
beg you, however, to defer your final judgment and to enter upon the
consideration of these new subjects with a kindly disposition, for such
pioneer work in virgin soil requires not only the greatest patience on
the part of the investigator, but also the unprejudiced attention of
his audience. Because the Freudian investigations apparently involve a
discussion of the most intimate secrets of sexuality many people have
had a feeling of repulsion against them, and have therefore rejected
everything as a matter of course without any real disproof. This,
unfortunately, has almost always been the fate of Freud's doctrines up
to the present. One must not come to the consideration of these matters
with the firm conviction that they do not exist, for it may easily
happen that for the prejudiced they really do not exist. One should
perhaps assume the author's point of view for the moment and investigate
these phenomena under his guidance. Only in this way can the correctness
or otherwise of our observations be affirmed. We may err, as all human
beings err. But the continual holding up to us of our mistakes--perhaps
they are worse than mistakes--does not help us to see things more
distinctly. We should prefer to see _wherein_ we err. That should be
demonstrated to us in our own sphere of experience. Thus far, however,
no one has succeeded in meeting us on our own ground, nor in giving us a
different conception of the things which we ourselves see. We still have
to complain that our critics persist in maintaining complete ignorance
about the matters in question. The only reason for this is that they
have never taken the trouble to become thoroughly acquainted with our
method; had they done this they would have understood us.

The little girl to whose sagacity and intellectual vivacity we are
indebted for the following observations is a healthy, lively child of
emotional temperament. She has never been seriously ill, and never,
even in the realm of the nervous system, had there been observed any
symptoms prior to this investigation. In the report which follows we
shall have to waive any connected description, for it is made up of
anecdotes which treat of one experience out of a whole cycle of similar
ones, and which cannot, therefore, be arranged scientifically and
systematically, but must rather be described somewhat in the form of a
story. We cannot as yet dispense with this manner of description in our
analytical psychology, for we are still far from being able in all cases
to separate with unerring certainty what is curious from what is typical.

When the little daughter, whom we will call Anna, was about three years
old, she once had the following conversation with her grandmother:

Anna: "Grandma, why are your eyes so dim?"

Grandma: "Because I am old."

A.: "But you will become young again."

G.: "No, do you know, I shall become older and older, and then I shall
die."

A.: "Well, and then?"

G.: "Then I shall be an angel."

A.: "And then will you be a little baby again?"

The child found here a welcome opportunity for the provisional solution
of a problem. For some time before she had been in the habit of asking
her mother whether she would ever have a living doll, a little child, a
little brother. This naturally included the question as to the origin of
children. As such questions appeared only spontaneously and indirectly,
the parents attached no significance to them, but responded to them
as lightly and in appearance as carelessly as the child seemed to ask
them. Thus she once received from her father the pretty story that
children are brought by the stork. Anna had already heard somewhere a
more serious version, namely, that children, are little angels living
in heaven, and are brought from heaven by the stork. This theory seems
to have become the starting point for the investigating activity of the
little one. From the conversation with the grandmother it could be seen
that this theory was capable of wide application, namely, it not only
solved in a comforting manner the painful idea of parting and dying,
but at the same time also the riddle of the origin of children. Such
solutions which kill at least two birds with one stone were formerly
tenaciously adhered to in science, and cannot be removed from the mind
of the child without a certain amount of shock.

Just as the birth of a little sister was the turning point in the
history of "Little Hans," so in this case it was the birth of a
brother, which happened when Anna had reached the age of four years.
The pregnancy of the mother apparently remained unnoticed; _i.e._ the
child never expressed herself on this subject. On the evening before the
birth, when labour pains were beginning, the child was in her father's
room. He took her on his knee and said, "Tell me, what would you say
if you should get a little brother to-night?" "I would kill him" was
the prompt answer. The expression "to kill" looks very serious, but
in reality it is quite harmless, for "to kill" and "to die" in child
language signify only to remove, either in the active or in the passive
sense, as has already been pointed out a number of times by Freud.
"To kill" as used by the child is a harmless word, especially so when
we know that the child uses the word "kill" quite promiscuously for
all possible kinds of destruction, removal, demolition, etc. It is,
nevertheless, worth while to note this tendency (see the analysis of
_Kleiner Hans_, p. 5).

The birth occurred early in the morning, and later the father entered
the room where Anna slept. She awoke as he came in. He imparted to her
the news of the advent of a little brother, which she took with surprise
and strained facial expression. The father took her in his arms and
carried her into the lying-in room. She first threw a rapid glance at
her somewhat pale mother and then displayed something like a mixture of
embarrassment and suspicion as if thinking, "Now what else is going to
happen?" (Father's impression.) She displayed hardly any pleasure at the
sight of the new arrival, so that the cool reception she gave it caused
general disappointment. During the forenoon she kept very noticeably
away from her mother; this was the more striking as she was usually
much attached to her. But once when her mother was alone she ran into
the room, embraced her and said, "Well, aren't you going to die now?"
Now a part of the conflict in the child's psyche is revealed to us.
Though the stork theory was never really taken seriously, she accepted
the fruitful re-birth hypothesis, according to which a person by dying
helps a child into life. Accordingly the mother, too, must die; why,
then, should the newborn child, against whom she already felt childish
jealousy, cause her pleasure? It was for this reason that she had to
seek a favourable opportunity of reassuring herself as to whether the
mother was to die, or rather was moved to express the hope that she
would not die.

With this happy issue, however, the re-birth theory sustained a severe
shock. How was it possible now to explain the birth of her little
brother and the origin of children in general? There still remained the
stork theory which, though never expressly rejected, had been implicitly
waived through the assumption of the re-birth theory. The explanations
next attempted unfortunately remained hidden from the parents as the
child went to stay with her grandmother for a few weeks. From the
latter's report the stork theory was often discussed, and was naturally
reinforced by the concurrence of those about her.

When Anna returned to her parents, she again, on meeting her mother,
evinced the same mixture of embarrassment and suspicion which she had
displayed after the birth. The impression, though inexplicable, was
quite unmistakable to both parents. Her behaviour towards the baby was
very nice. During her absence a nurse had come into the house who, on
account of her uniform, made a deep impression on Anna; to be sure, the
impression at first was quite unfavourable as she evinced the greatest
hostility to her. Thus nothing could induce her to allow herself to
be undressed and put to sleep by this nurse. Whence this resistance
originated was soon shown in an angry scene near the cradle of the
little brother in which Anna shouted at the nurse, "This is not your
little brother, he is mine!" Gradually, however, she became reconciled
to the nurse, and began to play nurse herself; she had to have her white
cap and apron, and "nursed" now her little brother, and now her doll.

In contrast to her former mood she became unmistakably mournful and
dreamy. She often sat for a long time under the table singing stories
and making rhymes, which were partially incomprehensible but sometimes
contained the "nurse" theme ("I am a nurse of the green cross"). Some of
the stories, however, distinctly showed a painful feeling striving for
expression.

Here we meet with a new and important feature in the little one's life:
that is, we meet with reveries, even a tendency towards poetic fancies
and melancholic attacks. All of them things which we are wont first
to encounter at a later period of life, at a time when the youth or
maiden is preparing to sever the family tie and to enter independently
upon life, but is still held back by an inward, painful feeling of
homesickness for the warmth of the parental hearth. At such a time the
youth begins to replace what is lacking with poetic fancies in order
to compensate for the deficiency. To approximate the psychology of a
four-year-old child to that of the youth approaching puberty will at
first sight seem paradoxical; the relationship lies, however, not in the
age but rather in the mechanism. The elegiac reveries express the fact
that a part of that love which formerly belonged, and should belong,
to a real object, is now _introverted_, that is, it is turned inward
into the subject and there produces an increased imaginative activity.
What is the origin of this _introversion_? Is it a psychological
manifestation peculiar to this age, or does it owe its origin to a
conflict?

This is explained in the following occurrence. It often happened that
Anna was disobedient to her mother, she was insolent, saying, "I am
going back to grandma."

Mother: "But I shall be sad when you leave me."

Anna: "Oh, but you have my little brother."

This reaction towards the mother shows what the little one was really
aiming at with her threats to go away again; she apparently wished to
hear what her mother would say to her proposal, that is, to see what
attitude her mother would actually assume to her, whether her little
brother had not ousted her altogether from her mother's regard. One
must, however, give no credence to this little trickster. For the child
could readily see and feel that, despite the existence of the little
brother, there was nothing essentially lacking to her in her mother's
love. The reproach to which she subjects her mother is therefore
unjustified, and to the trained ear this is betrayed by a slightly
affected tone. Such an unmistakable tone does not expect to be taken
seriously and hence it obtrudes itself more vehemently. The reproach
as such cannot be taken seriously by the mother, for it was only the
forerunner of other and this time more serious resistances. Not long
after the conversation narrated above, the following scene took place:

Mother: "Come, we are going into the garden now!"

Anna: "You are telling lies, take care if you are not telling the truth."

M.: "What are you thinking of? I _am_ telling the truth."

A.: "No, you are not telling the truth."

M.: "You will soon see that I am telling the truth: we are going into
the garden now."

A.: "Indeed, is that true? Is that really true? Are you not lying?"

Scenes of this kind were repeated a number of times. This time the
tone was more rude and more vehement, and at the same time the accent
on the word "lie" betrayed something special which the parents did not
understand; indeed, at first they attributed too little significance to
the spontaneous utterances of the child. In this they merely did what
education usually does in general, _ex officio_. We usually pay little
heed to children in every stage of life; in all essential matters, they
are treated as not responsible, and in all unessential matters, they are
trained with an automatic precision.

Under resistances there always lies a question, a conflict, of which we
hear later and on other occasions. But usually one forgets to connect
the thing heard with the resistances. Thus, on another occasion, Anna
put to her mother the following questions:--

Anna: "I should like to become a nurse when I grow big--why did you not
become a nurse?"

Mother: "Why, as I have become a mother I have children to nurse anyway."

A. (Reflecting): "Indeed, shall I be a lady like you, and shall I talk
to you then?"

The mother's answer again shows whither the child's question was really
directed. Apparently Anna, too, would like to have a child to "nurse"
just as the nurse has. Where the nurse got the little child is quite
clear. Anna, too, could get a child in the same way if she were big.
Why did not the mother become such a nurse, that is to say, how did
she get a child if not in the same way as the nurse? Like the nurse,
Anna, too, could get a child, but how that fact might be changed in
the future or how she might come to resemble her mother in the matter
of getting children is not clear to her. From this resulted the
thoughtful question, "Indeed, shall I be a lady like you? Shall I be
quite different?" The stork theory evidently had come to naught, the
dying theory met a similar fate; hence she now thinks one may get a
child in the same way, as, for example, the nurse got hers. She, too,
could get one in this natural way, but how about the mother who is no
nurse and still has children? Looking at the matter from this point of
view, Anna asks: "Why did you not become a nurse?" namely, "why have
you not got your child in the natural way?" This peculiar indirect
manner of questioning is typical, and evidently corresponds with the
child's hazy grasp of the problem, unless we assume a certain diplomatic
uncertainty prompted by a desire to evade direct questioning. We shall
later find an illustration of this possibility. Anna is evidently
confronted with the question "Where does the child come from?" The
stork did not bring it; mother did not die; nor did mother get it in
the same way as the nurse. She has, however, asked this question before
and received the information from her father that the stork brings
children; this is positively untrue, she can never be deceived on
this point. Accordingly, papa and mama and all the others lie. This
readily explains her suspicion at the childbirth and her discrediting
of her mother. But it also explains another point, namely, the elegiac
reveries which we have attributed to a partial introversion. We know
now what was the real object from which love was removed and uselessly
introverted, namely, it had to be taken _from the parents_ who deceived
her and refused to tell her the truth. (What can this be which must not
be uttered? What is going on here?) Such were the parenthetic questions
of the child, and the answer was: Evidently this must be something to
be concealed, perhaps something dangerous. Attempts to make her talk
and to draw out the truth by means of artful questions were futile,
so _resistance is placed against resistance_, and the introversion
of love begins. It is evident that the capacity for sublimation in a
four-year-old child is still too slightly developed to be capable of
performing more than symptomatic services. The mind, therefore, depends
on another compensation, namely, it resorts to one of the relinquished
infantile devices for securing love by force, preferably that of crying
and calling the mother at night. This had been diligently practised
and exhausted during her first year. It now returns, and corresponding
to the period of life has become well determined and equipped with
recent impressions. It was just after the earthquakes in Messina, and
this event was discussed at the table. Anna was extremely interested
in everything, she repeatedly asked her grandmother to tell her how
the earth shook, how the houses fell in and many people lost their
lives. After this she had nocturnal fears, she could not be alone, her
mother had to go to her and stay with her; otherwise she feared that an
earthquake would happen, that the house would fall and kill her. During
the day, too, she was much occupied with such thoughts. While walking
with her mother she annoyed her with such questions as, "Will the house
be standing when we return home? Are you sure there is no earthquake at
home? Will papa still be living?" About every stone lying in the road
she asked whether it was from an earthquake. A building in course of
erection was a house destroyed by the earthquake, etc. Finally, she
began to cry out frequently at night that the earthquake was coming and
that she heard the thunder. Each evening she had to be solemnly assured
that there was no earthquake coming.

Many means of calming her were tried, thus she was told, for example,
that earthquakes only occur where there are volcanoes. But then she
had to be satisfied that the mountains surrounding the city were not
volcanoes. This reasoning led the child by degrees to a desire for
learning, as strong as it was unnatural at her age, which showed itself
in a demand that all the geological atlases and text-books should be
brought to her from her father's library. For hours she rummaged through
these works looking for pictures of volcanoes and earthquakes, and
asking questions continually. Here we are confronted by an energetic
effort to sublimate the fear into an eager desire for knowledge,
which at this age made a decidedly premature exaction. But how many
a gifted child suffering in exactly the same way with such problems,
is "cosseted" through this untimely sublimation, by no means to its
advantage. For, by favouring sublimation at this age one is merely
strengthening manifestation of neurosis. The root of the eager desire
for knowledge is _fear_, and _fear is the expression of converted
libido_; that is, it is the expression of _an introversion which has
become neurotic_, which at this age is neither necessary nor favourable
for the development of the child.

Whither this eager desire for knowledge was ultimately directed is
explained by a series of questions which arose almost daily. "Why is
Sophie (a younger sister) younger than I?" "Where was Freddie (the
little brother) before? Was he in heaven? What was he doing there? Why
did he come down just now, why not before?"

This state of affairs led the father to decide that the mother should
tell the child when occasion offered _the truth concerning the origin
of the little brother_. This having been done, Anna soon thereafter
asked about the stork. Her mother told her that the story of the stork
was not true, but that Freddie grew inside his mother like the flowers
in a plant. At first he was very little, and then he became bigger and
bigger as a plant does. She listened attentively without the slightest
surprise, and then asked, "But did he come out all by himself?"

Mother: "Yes."

Anna: "But he cannot walk!"

Sophie: "Then he crawled out."

Anna, overhearing her little sister's answer: "Is there a hole here?
(pointing to the breast) or did he come out of the mouth? Who came
out of the nurse?" She then interrupted herself and exclaimed, "No,
no, the stork brought baby brother down from heaven." She soon left
the subject and again wished to see pictures of volcanoes. During the
evening following this conversation she was calm. The sudden explanation
produced in the child a whole series of ideas, which manifested
themselves in certain questions. New unexpected perspectives were
opened; she rapidly approached the main problem, namely, the question,
"_Where did the baby come out?_" _Was it from a hole in the breast
or from the mouth?_ Both suppositions are entirely qualified to form
acceptable theories. We even meet with recently married women who
still entertain the theory of the hole in the abdominal wall or of the
Cæsarean section; this is supposed to betray a very unusual degree of
innocence. But as a matter of fact it is not innocence; we are always
dealing in such cases with infantile sexual activities, which in later
life have brought the _vias naturales_ into ill repute.

It may be asked where the child got the absurd idea that there is a
hole in the breast, or that the birth takes place through the mouth.
Why did she not select one of the natural openings existing in the
pelvis from which things come out daily? The explanation is simple. Very
shortly before, our little one had invoked some educational criticism
from her mother by a heightened interest in both openings with their
remarkable excretions,--an interest not always in accord with the
requirements of cleanliness and decorum. Then for the first time she
became acquainted with the exceptional laws relating to these bodily
regions and, being a sensitive child, she soon learned that there was
something here to be tabooed. This region, therefore, must not be
referred to. Anna had simply shown herself docile and had so adjusted
herself to the cultural demands that she thought (at least spoke) of the
simplest things last. The incorrect theories substituted for correct
laws sometimes persist for years until brusque explanations come from
without. It is, therefore, no wonder that such theories, the forming of
and adherence to which are favoured even by parents and educationalists
should later become determinants for important symptoms in a neurosis,
or of delusions in a psychosis, just as I have shown that in dementia
præcox[144] what has existed in the mind for years always remains
somewhere, though it may be hidden under compensations of a seemingly
different kind.

But even before this question was settled as to where the child really
comes out a new problem obtruded itself, viz. the children came out
of the mother, but how is it with the nurse? Did some one come out of
her too? This question was followed by the remark, "No, no, the stork
brought down baby brother from heaven." What is there peculiar about the
fact that nobody came out of the nurse? We recall that Anna identified
herself with the nurse, and planned to become a nurse later, for she,
too, would like to have a child, and she could have one as well as the
nurse. But now when it is known that the little brother grew in mama,
how is it now?

This disquieting question is averted by a quick return to the
stork-angel theory which has never been really believed and which after
a few trials is at last definitely abandoned. Two questions, however,
remain in the air. The first reads as follows: Where does the child come
out? The second, a considerably more difficult one, reads: How does it
happen that mama has children while the nurse and the servants do not?
All these questions did not at first manifest themselves.

On the day following the explanation, while at dinner, Anna
spontaneously remarked: "My brother is in Italy, and has a house of
cloth and glass, but it does not tumble down."

In this case, as in the others, it was impossible to ask for an
explanation; the resistances were too great and Anna could not be drawn
into conversation. This former officious and pretty explanation is very
significant. For some three months the two sisters had been building
a stereotyped fanciful conception of a "big brother." This brother
knows everything, he can do and has everything, he has been and is in
every place where the children are not; he is owner of great cows,
oxen, horses, dogs; everything is his, etc. Every one has such a "big
brother." We must not look far for the origin of this fancy; the model
for it is the _father_ who seems to correspond to this conception;
he seems to be like a brother to mama. The children, too, have their
similar powerful "brother." This brother is very brave; he is at present
in dangerous Italy and inhabits an impossible fragile house, and _it
does not tumble down_. For the child this realises an important wish:
_the earthquake is no longer to be dangerous_; in consequence _the
child's fear disappeared and did not return_. The fear of earthquakes
now entirely vanished. Instead of calling her father to her bed to
conjure away the fear, she now became very affectionate and begged him
every night to kiss her.

In order to test this new state of affairs the father showed her
pictures illustrating volcanoes and earthquake devastations. Anna
remained unaffected, she examined the pictures with indifference,
remarking, "These people are dead; I have already seen that quite
often." The picture of a volcanic eruption no longer had any attraction
for her. Thus all her scientific interest collapsed and vanished as
suddenly as it came. During the days following the explanation Anna had
quite important matters to occupy herself with; she disseminated her
newly acquired knowledge among those about her in the following manner:
She began by again circumstantially affirming what had been told her,
viz. that Freddy, her younger sister, and herself had grown in her
mother, that papa and mama grew in their mothers, and that the servants
likewise grew in their respective mothers. By frequent questions she
tested the true basis of her knowledge, for her suspicion was aroused in
no small measure, so that it needed many confirmations to remove all her
uncertainties.

On one occasion the trustworthiness of the theory threatened to go
to pieces. About a week after the explanation, the father was taken
ill with influenza and had to remain in bed during the forenoon. The
children knew nothing about this, and Anna, coming into the parents'
bedroom, saw what was quite unusual, namely, that her father was
remaining in bed. She again took on a peculiar surprised expression; she
remained at a distance from the bed and would not come nearer; she was
apparently again reserved and suspicious. But suddenly she burst out
with the question, "Why are you in bed; have you a plant in your inside
too?"

The father naturally had to laugh. He calmed her, however, by assuring
her that children never grow in the father, that only women can have
children, and not men; thereupon the child again became friendly. But
though the surface was calm the problems continued to work in the dark.
A few days later, while at dinner, Anna related the following dream:
"I dreamed last night of Noah's ark." The father then asked her what
she had dreamed about it, but Anna's answer was sheer nonsense. In such
cases it is necessary only to wait and pay attention. A few minutes
later she said to her mother, "I dreamed last night about Noah's ark,
and there were a lot of little animals in it." Another pause. She then
began her story for the third time. "_I dreamed last night about Noah's
ark, and there were a lot of baby animals in it, and underneath there
was a lid and that opened and all the baby animals fell out._"

The children really had a Noah's ark, but its opening, a lid, was on the
roof and not underneath. In this way she delicately intimated that the
story of the birth from mouth or breast is incorrect, and that she had
some inkling where the children came out.

A few weeks then passed without any noteworthy occurrences. On one
occasion she related the following dream: "_I dreamed about papa and
mama; they had been sitting late in the study, and we children were
there too._" On the face of this we find a wish of the children to be
allowed to sit up as long as the parents. This wish is here realised,
or rather it is utilised to express a more important wish, namely, _to
be present in the evening when the parents are alone_; of course, quite
innocently, it was in the _study_ where she has seen all the interesting
books, and where she has satiated her thirst for knowledge; _i.e._ she
was really seeking an answer to the burning question, whence the little
brother came. If the children were there they would find out.[145] A
few days later Anna had a terrifying dream from which she awoke crying,
"The earthquake is coming, the house has begun to shake." Her mother
went to her and calmed her by saying that the earthquake was not coming,
that everything was quiet, and that everybody was asleep. Whereupon Anna
said: "_I would like to see the spring, when all the little flowers are
coming out and the whole lawn is full of flowers; I would like to see
Freddy, he has such a dear little face. What is papa doing? What is he
saying?_" The mother said, "He is asleep, and isn't saying anything
now." Little Anna then remarked with a sarcastic smile: "_He will surely
be sick again to-morrow._"

This text should be read backwards. The last sentence was not meant
seriously, as it was uttered in a mocking tone. When the father was sick
the last time, Anna suspected that he had a "plant in his inside." The
sarcasm signifies: "To-morrow papa is surely going to have a child." But
this also is not meant seriously. Papa is not going to have a child;
mama alone has children; perhaps she will have another child to-morrow;
but where from? "What does papa do?" The formulation of the difficult
problem seems here to come to the surface. It reads: What does papa
really do if he does not bear children? The little one is very anxious
to have a solution for all these problems; she would like to know how
Freddy came into the world, she would like to see how the little flowers
come out of the earth in the spring, and these wishes are hidden behind
the fear of earthquakes.

After this intermezzo Anna slept quietly until morning. In the morning
her mother asked her what she had dreamed. She did not at first recall
anything, and then said: "_I dreamed that I could make the summer, and
then some one threw a Punch_[146] _down into the closet._"

This peculiar dream apparently has two different scenes which are
separated by "then." The second part draws its material from the recent
wish to possess a Punch, that is, to have a boy doll just as mama has
a little boy. Some one threw Punch down into the closet; one often
lets other things fall down into the water closet. _It is just like
this that the children, too, come out._ We have here an analogy to the
"Lumpf-theory" of little Hans.[147] Whenever several scenes are found
in one dream, each scene ordinarily represents a particular variation
of the complex elaboration. Here accordingly the first part is only a
variation of the theme found in the second part. The meaning of "to see
the spring" or "to see the little flowers come out" we have already
remarked. Anna now dreams that she _can make the summer_, that is she
can bring it about that the little flowers shall come out. She herself
can make a little child, and the second part of the dream represents
this just as one makes a motion in the w.c. Here we find the egoistic
wish which is behind the seemingly objective interest of the previous
night's conversation.

A few days later the mother was visited by a lady who expected soon to
become a mother. The children seemed to take no interest in the matter,
but the next day they amused themselves with the following play which
was directed by the elder girl; they took all the newspapers they
could find in their father's paper-basket and stuffed them under their
clothes, so that the imitation was unmistakable. During the night little
Anna had another dream: "_I dreamed about a woman in the city; she had
a very big stomach._" The chief actor in a dream is always the dreamer
himself under some definite aspect; thus the childish play of the day
before is fully solved.

Not long after, Anna surprised her mother with the following
performance: She stuck her doll under her clothes, then pulled it out
slowly head downwards, and at the same time remarked, "_Look, the baby
is coming out, now it is all out._" By this means Anna tells her mother,
"You see, thus I apprehend the problem of birth. What do you think of
it? Is that right?" The play is really meant to be a question, for,
as we shall see later, this idea had to be officially confirmed. That
rumination on this problem by no means ended here, is shown by the
occasional ideas conceived during the following weeks. Thus she repeated
the same play a few days later with her Teddy Bear, who stands in the
relation of an especially beloved doll. One day, looking at a rose,
she said to her grandmother, "See, the rose is getting a baby." As her
grandmother did not quite understand her, she pointed to the enlarged
calyx and said, "Don't you see it is quite fat here?"

Anna once quarrelled with her younger sister, and the latter exclaimed
angrily, "I will kill you." Whereupon Anna answered, "When I am dead you
will be all alone; then you will have to pray to God for a live baby."
But the scene soon changed: Anna was the angel, and the younger sister
was forced to kneel before her and pray to her that she should present
to her a living child. In this way Anna became the child-dispensing
mother.

Oranges were once served at table. Anna impatiently asked for one and
said, "_I am going to take an orange and swallow it all down into my
stomach, and then I shall get a baby._" Who does not think here of
fairy tales in which childless women become pregnant by swallowing
fruit, fish, and similar things?[148] In this way Anna sought to solve
the problem _how the children actually come into the mother_. She thus
enters into a formulation which hitherto had not been defined with
so much clearness. The solution follows in the form of an _analogy_,
which is quite characteristic of the archaic thinking of the child.
(In the adult, too, there is a kind of thinking by metaphor which
belongs to the stratum lying immediately below consciousness; dreams
bring the analogies to the surface; the same may be observed also in
dementia præcox.) In German as well as in numerous foreign fairy tales
one frequently finds such characteristic childish comparisons. Fairy
tales seem to be the myths of the child, and therefore contain among
other things the mythology which the child weaves concerning the sexual
processes. The spell of the fairy tale poetry, which is felt even by
the adult, is explained by the fact that some of the old theories
are still alive in our unconscious minds. We experience a strange,
peculiar and familiar feeling when a conception of our remotest youth
is again stimulated. Without becoming conscious it merely sends into
consciousness a feeble copy of its original emotional strength.

The problem how the child gets into the mother was difficult to solve.
As the only way of taking things into the body is through the mouth, it
could evidently be assumed that the mother ate something like a fruit,
which then grows inside her. But then comes another difficulty, namely,
it is clear enough what the mother produces, but it is not yet clear
what the father is good for.

What does the father do? Anna now occupied herself exclusively with this
question. One morning she ran into the parents' bedroom while they were
dressing, she jumped into her father's bed, lay face downwards, kicked
with her legs and called at the same time, "_Look! does papa do that?_"
The analogy to the horse of "little Hans" which raised such disturbance
with its legs, is very surprising.

With this last performance the problem seemed to be at rest entirely,
at least the parents found no opportunity to make any pertinent
observations. That the problem should come to a standstill just here
is not at all surprising, for this is really its most difficult part.
Moreover, we know from experience that not many children go beyond
these limits during the period of childhood. The problem is almost
too difficult for the childish mind, which still lacks much knowledge
necessary to its solution.

This standstill lasted about five months, during which no phobias or
other signs of complex-elaboration appeared. After this lapse of time
there appeared premonitory signs of some new incidents. Anna's family
lived at that time in the country near a lake where the mother and
children could bathe. As Anna was afraid to wade farther into the water
than knee-deep, her father once put her into the water, which led to
an outburst of crying. In the evening while going to bed Anna asked
her mother, "Do you not believe that father wanted to drown me?" A few
days later there was another outburst of crying. She continued to stand
in the gardener's way until he finally placed her in a newly dug hole.
Anna cried bitterly, and afterwards maintained that the gardener wished
to bury her. Finally she awoke during the night with fearful crying.
Her mother went to her in the adjoining room and quieted her. She had
dreamed that "a train passed and then fell in a heap."

This tallies with the "stage coach" of "little Hans." These incidents
showed clearly enough that fear was again in the air, _i.e._ that a
resistance had again arisen preventing transference to the parents,
and that therefore a great part of her love was converted into fear.
This time suspicion was not directed against the mother, but against
the father, who she was sure must know the secret, but would never
let anything out. What could the father be doing or keeping secret?
To the child this secret appeared as something dangerous, so that she
felt the worst might be expected from the father. (This feeling of
childish anxiety with the father as object we see again most distinctly
in adults, especially in dementia præcox, which lifts the veil of
obscurity from many unconscious processes, as though it were following
psychoanalytic principles.) It was for this reason that Anna came to
the apparently absurd conclusion that her father wanted to drown her.
At the same time her fear contained the thought that the _object of the
father had some relation to a dangerous action_. This stream of thought
is no arbitrary interpretation. Anna meanwhile grew a little older and
her interest in her father took on a special colouring which is hard to
describe. Language has no words to describe the quite unique kind of
tender curiosity which shone in the child's eyes.

Anna once took marked delight in assisting the gardener while he was
sowing grass, without apparently divulging the profound significance
of her play. About a fortnight later she began to observe with great
pleasure the young grass sprouting. On one of these occasions she asked
her mother the following question: "Tell me, how did the eyes grow into
the head?" The mother told her that she did not know. Anna, however,
continued to ask whether God or her papa could tell this? The mother
then referred her to her father, who might tell her how the eyes grew
into the head. A few days later there was a family reunion at tea. When
the guests had departed, the father remained at the table reading the
paper and Anna also remained. Suddenly approaching her father she said,
"Tell me, how did the eyes grow into the head?"

Father: "They did not grow into the head; they were there from the
beginning and grew with the head."

A.: "Were not the eyes planted?"

F.: "No, they grew in the head like the nose."

A.: "Did the mouth and the ears grow in the same way? and the hair, too?"

F.: "Yes, they all grew in the same way."

A.: "And the hair, too? But the mousies came into the world naked. Where
was the hair before? Aren't there little seeds for it?"

F.: "No; you see, the hair really came out of little grains which are
like seeds, but these were already in the skin long before and nobody
sowed them." The father was now getting concerned; he knew whither the
little one's thoughts were directed, but he did not wish to overthrow,
for the sake of a former false application, the opportunely established
seed-theory which she had most fortunately gathered from nature; but the
child spoke with an unwonted seriousness which demanded consideration.

Anna (evidently disappointed, and in a distressed tone): "But how did
Freddy get into mama? Who stuck him in? and who stuck you into your
mama? Where did he come out from?"

From this sudden storm of questions the father chose the last for
his first answer. "Just think, you know well enough that Freddy is a
boy; boys become men and girls women. Only women and not men can have
children; now just think, where could Freddy come out from?"

A. (Laughs joyfully and points to her genitals): "Did he come out here?"

Father: "Yes, of course, you certainly must have thought of this before?"

A. (Overlooking the question): "But how did Freddy get into mama? Did
anybody plant him? Was the seed planted?"

This very precise question could no longer be evaded by the father.
He explained to the child, who listened with the greatest attention,
that the mother is like the soil and the father like the gardener; that
the father provides the seed which grows in the mother, and thus gives
origin to a baby. This answer gave extraordinary satisfaction; she
immediately ran to her mother and said, "Papa has told me everything,
now I know it all." She did not, however, tell what she knew.

The new knowledge was, however, put into play the following day. Anna
went to her mother and said, "Think, mama, papa told me how Freddy was
a little angel and was brought from heaven by a stork." The mother was
naturally surprised and said, "No, you are mistaken, papa surely never
told you such a thing!" whereupon the little one laughed and ran away.

This was apparently a mode of revenge. Her mother did not wish or was
not able to tell her how the eyes grew into the head, hence she did not
know how Freddy got into her. It was for this reason that she again
tried her with the old story.

I wish to impress firmly upon parents and educationists this instructive
example of child psychology. In the learned psychological discussions
on the child's psyche we hear nothing about those parts which are so
important for the health and naturalness of our children, nor do we hear
more about the child's emotions and conflicts; and yet they play a most
important rôle.

It very often happens that children are erroneously treated as quite
imprudent and irrational beings. Thus on indulgently remarking to
an intelligent father, whose four-year-old daughter masturbated
excessively, that care should be exercised in the presence of the child
who slept in the same room as the parents, I received the indignant
reply, "I can absolutely assure you that the child knows nothing about
sexual matters." This recalls that distinguished old neurologist who
wished to deny the attribute "sexual" to a childbirth phantasy which was
represented in a dreamy state.

On the other hand, a child evincing neurotic talent exaggerated by
neurosis may be urged on by solicitous parents. How easy and tempting
it would have been, _e.g._ in the present case, to admire, excite, and
develop prematurely the child's eager desire for learning, and thereby
develop an unnatural _blasé_ state and a precociousness masking a
neurosis! In such cases the parents must look after their own complexes
and complex tendencies and not make capital out of them at the expense
of the child. The idea should be dismissed once for all that children
are to be held in bondage by their parents or that they are their toys.
They are characteristic and new beings. In the matter of enlightenment
on sexual things it can be affirmed that they suffer from the
preconceived opinion that the truth is harmful. Many neurologists are of
opinion that even in grown-ups enlightenment on their own psychosexual
processes is harmful and even immoral. Would not the same persons
perhaps refuse to admit the existence of the genitals themselves?

One should not, however, go from this extreme of prudishness to the
opposite one, namely that of enlightenment _à tout prix_, which may
turn out as foolish as it is disagreeable. In this matter I believe
much discretion is advisable; still if children come upon an idea, they
should be deceived no more than adults.

I hope, ladies and gentlemen, that I have shown you what complicated
psychic processes psychoanalytic investigation reveals in the child, and
how great is the significance of these processes for the mental health
as well as for the general psychic development of the child. What I have
been unable to show is the universal validity of these observations.
Unfortunately, I am not in a position to demonstrate this, for I do not
know myself how much of it is universally valid. Only by accumulation
of such observations and further penetration into the problems broached
shall we gain a complete insight into the laws of psychical development.
It is to be regretted that we are at present still far from this goal.
But I confidently hope that educators and practical psychologists,
whether physicians or deep-thinking parents, will not leave us too long
unassisted in this immensely important and interesting field.

LITERATURE.

     1. FREUD. "Die Traumdeutung," II Auflage. Deuticke, Wien, 1909.

     2. ---- ----. "Sammlung kleiner Schriften zur Neurosenlehre," Band
     I & II. Deuticke, Wien.

     3. ---- ----. "Analyse der Phobie eines 5 jahrigen Knaben,"
     _Jahrbuch für Psychoanalytische u. Psychopathologische
     Forschungen_, Band I. Deuticke, Wien, 1908.

     4. FREUD. "Der Inhalt der Psychose," _Freud's Shriften zur
     angewandten Seelenkunde._ Deuticke, 1908.

     5. JUNG. "Diagnostische Associationsstudien," Band I. Barth,
     Leipzig, 1906.

     6. ---- ----. "Die Psychologische Diagnose des Thatbestandes." Carl
     Marhold, Halle, 1906.

     7. JUNG. "Die Bedeutung des Vaters für das Schicksal des
     Einzelnen." Deuticke, Wien, 1908.

     8. JUNG. "The Psychology of Dementia Præcox," translated by
     Peterson and Brill, _Journal of Mental and Nervous Diseases_,
     Monograph Series, No. 2.

     9. FÜRST. "Statistische Untersuchungen über Wortassoziationen
     und über familiäre Übereinstimmung im Reactionstypus bei
     Ungebildeten," X. Beitrag der Diagnost. Assoc. Studien, vol. II.

     10. BRILL. "Psychological Factors in Dementia Præcox,"
     _Journal of Abnormal Psychology_, vol. III., No. 4.

     11. ---- ----. "A case of Schizophrenia," _American Journal of
     Insanity_, vol. LXVI., No. 1.

     12. "Le Nuove Vedute della Psicologia Criminale," _Rivista de
     Psicologia Applicata_, 1908, No. 4.

     13. "L'Analyse des Rêves," _Année Psychologique_, 1909, Tome
     XV.

     14. "Associations d'idées Familiales," _Archives de
     Psychologie_, T. VII., No. 26.

FOOTNOTES:

[Footnote 125: Lectures delivered at the celebration of the twentieth
anniversary of the opening of Clark University, September, 1909;
translated from the German by Dr. A. A. Brill, of New York. Reprinted by
kind permission of Dr. Stanley Hall.]

[Footnote 126: The selection of these stimulus words was naturally made
for the German language only, and would probably have to be considerably
changed for the English language.]

[Footnote 127: Denotes misunderstanding.]

[Footnote 128: Denotes repetition of the stimulus words.]

[Footnote 129: Denotes repetition of the stimulus words.]

[Footnote 130: + denotes Reproduced unchanged.]

[Footnote 131: Denotes misunderstanding.]

[Footnote 132: Denotes repetition of the stimulus words.]

[Footnote 133: Denotes misunderstanding.]

[Footnote 134: Denotes repetition of the stimulus words.]

[Footnote 135: Denotes repetition of the stimulus words.]

[Footnote 136: Denotes repetition of the stimulus words.]

[Footnote 137: Denotes repetition of the stimulus words.]

[Footnote 138: Denotes repetition of the stimulus words.]

[Footnote 139: Reaction times are always given in fifths of a second.]

[Footnote 140: "Studies in Word Association," in course of publication.]

[Footnote 141: "Jahrbuch für Psychoanalytische und Psychopathologische
Forschungen," Band I. Deuticke, Wien, 1902.]

[Footnote 142: This lecture was originally published in the "Jahrbuch
für Psychoanalytische und Psychopathologische Forschungen," Band II.]

[Footnote 143: "Jahrbuch für Psychoanalytische und Psychopathologische
Forschungen," Band I. Deuticke, Wien, 1902.]

[Footnote 144: Jung: "The Psychology of Dementia Præcox," translated by
Peterson and Brill. _Journal of Nervous and Mental Diseases_, Monograph
Series, No. 3.]

[Footnote 145: This wish to sit up with the father and mother until late
at night often plays a great part later in a neurosis.]

[Footnote 146: A doll from Punch and Judy.]

[Footnote 147: See analysis of a five-year-old boy, _Jahrbuch f.
Psychoanalytische u. Psychopathologische Forschungen_, vol. I.]

[Footnote 148: Franz Riklin, "Fulfilment of Wishes and Symbolism in
Fairy Tales."]

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE FATHER IN THE DESTINY OF THE INDIVIDUAL[149]

_Ducunt volentem fata, nolentem trahunt._

Freud has pointed out in many places[150] with unmistakable clearness
that the psychosexual relationship of the child towards his parents,
particularly towards the father, possesses an overwhelming importance
in the content of any later neurosis. This relationship is in fact the
infantile channel _par excellence_ in which the libido flows back[151]
when it encounters any obstacles in later years, thus revivifying
long-forgotten dreams of childhood. It is ever so in life when we
draw back before too great an obstacle--the menace of some severe
disappointment or the risk of some too far-reaching decision--the
energy stored up for the solution of the task flows back impotent;
the by-streams once relinquished as inadequate are again filled up.
He who has missed the happiness of woman's love falls back, as a
substitute, upon some gushing friendship, upon masturbation, upon
religiosity; should he be a neurotic he plunges still further back into