iagaed bh aah + He = = : = are ads Satz = pr STE an cri bea Mngt RAM ett te ' iD rater stieete re isgttet eat eae oh rH 4 +4 i} y ‘i f 3 VAR 4 ¢ : rier ose Faby. +4 ed do oi * reel a fa a | te i Lp es = co. Arabs Hates rr 5 ~ > = CSPSRae =f ad Et ban) seat sr beygs ye WENA athe ek rere ft gaads iy RES DE a Hes ont : rey = atid i Wee aly MEG ay ee vee Bates pied = ae —— Mp begt edad Oe SER a Mek (pa giadd 4 net a8 sy it ' us it 11) A] eyahtd : eee Af yinas ; {PRAT AH ede i ; : ay Fi a ree ie “ rege’ Kok my rd ae iy Le apa on : rae itor Hite a eeraaebe) : t stata aiat Ci E arp b edt ne nedy AP AGY Hegel Bras ae 4% it ; hh ne A H Vad ¢ ) nie He) Brey ie Aa ao thy F Fauet Hy Hi} hte Heras gal Ue Rie ies sqsden eee ys bE} recheeF re Sine fin iat 5 ia bio Capua Peat ‘ink eee ! pad ; thrash i yas Bi psseme hel tet } ; 7 } ; i ih ae ee bt; i Rota rk tathacersee f 14 BEN : OM etre? (of aptet i has tas Lp MPa ueaeaeaeattt bs PCA ASD AMS Kyo MOUS ie Mee cee Be isa (ans) ‘ satan foactses bearer " } ive 4 4 ’ i Sota lets nie Wat besa Tse Aye 3 95 olkdip a Oat MAH ies | ROS “ye } N ; is 4 wits Bitte Rass Fe errands ih tr nite a TAS oh oe ee aria tit | pal tule 4 }) Pitter tent rere a Heb eatn! * Vi as atone : rod reve EVP ERE ODED B908 PE Hy dae Fit fe 4, Po tiuatitetlnn Pt iris seesdatets Hy i beth toaaet nity Bint as . " Math weer HAN bibs a : f Pere » id ¥ i jabadeb) L t rY ee bee pened ity a ie Waser bay ALAN Hi Noriega at Ww Si NTAas te ah Dshaeed eid ue atta rH Fe he a I - Aes: ee ai } wet u f Wiest agany ine Mie : Mt Maat been ii a Yeoverry Pevrr iit VOL. 34 eer REVIEW PUBLICATIONS WHOLE NO. r6gu Psychological Monographs EDITED BY SHEPHERD I. FRANZ, Unvv. or Catir., So. Br. HOWARD C. WARREN, Princeton University (Review) JOHN B. WATSON, Jouns Hopxins University (J. of Exp. Psych.) MADISON BENTLEY, Universiry or Ittrnois (Index) and S. W. FERNBERGER, University or PENNSYLVANIA (Bulletin) Splitting the Mind: An Experimental Study of Normal Men BY / CHARLES T. BURNETT BOWDOIN COLLEGE PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW COMPANY PRINCETON, N. J. AND ALBANY, N. Y. Acents: G. E. STECHERT & CO., Lonpon (2 Star Yard, Carey St., W. C.); Paris (16, rue de Condé) If a dedication to such a monograph were in order, this would be inscribed to the chef observers of these experiments, de ba egy Cae Sd we: Ae oi dl od bi upon whose careful work this book depends, and whose abundant help is gratefully ac- knowledged. 1 SY See INTRODUCTORY NOTE It is somewhat unusual to present full protocols in experiments under hypnosis. In the present instance it has seemed justifiable on account of the critical nature of the problem whose solution is here sought. In drawing conclusions the present experi- menter has not wittingly depended on any other data than those here spread out in full before the reader. If these do not war- rant the conclusion, nothing else will be whisked in surreptitiously by way of support. Should he, then, doubt the offered inter- pretation, he will have at hand the entire body of data with which his preferred interpretation will have to wrestle. Audi le " x td i ifs .* : ; ACKNOWLEDGMENT The cost of printing this monograph has been defrayed by Bowdoin College from a publication fund given by Dwight W. Morrow. Digitized by the Internet Archive In 2022 with funding from Princeton Theological Seminary Library — httos://archive.org/details/splittingmindexpOOburn CONTENTS PAGE etironological Order'of Experiments... 0.5.05 50405. ix een Mr Le ATETOCUCUON «. 1a at Av aia io Mu tecanel aia aes ase nba os 1 1. The Problem and the Standard of Proof.... 1 2. Experiments and Methods of the Past....... 5 6. Special Conditions and Methods of These Ex- : DETIMENTS ee uae ae is ae wate |. 9 Reatard Pere PODALIL VE UX peTIIMents. ccs) tug ead pele Sons os 15 Pattee Lae Contirmatory? bxperiments.) (hee. a a 74 Part IV. Check Experiments Mostly without Hypnosis.... 115 Matte) © <_onciusions.and Comments jak...) oe oo ko 129 ce rere i, t AB im ba | } CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER OF EXPERIMENTS , 1920 1920 1920 1920 1920 , 1920 1920 1920 1920 1920 1920 1920 1920 1920 1920 Observer CH, BT tee pe SE FO a oP oo 2fePCr chess Ratt araas tapes EE i hae tena cee ed a NOTSSOUH ANNO DATO VANOMmmTANAAAANgAAAHAND Reference Symbol np — 4+. wW ES ER bd > ba bd Dd and image-formation.® Of these none but the first two seems suitable to furnish independent proof of the fact in question, by the standard for proof which has been stated above. Conceivably, by use of hypnosis, the memory test (Canon 4 above) might be applicable to all, and, in the case of hysterical dissociation, even without hypnosis. I am not aware, however, that the memory test has actually been applied with any of these methods except the first two. The results so far obtained, though, by these other methods seem to have confirma- tory, rather, than independently probative, force. Those by the image-formation method, indeed, are, in their psychic abundance and variety, as found, an affair of “ primary ”’ consciousness, and only by interpretation are assigned causally to a subconsciousness of correspondingly varied content. Relying upon our standard of proof, Prince’? has, it seems, experimentally demonstrated the existence of co-conscious- ness in two abnormal individuals. In addition, Prince and Peterson, working with the psycho-galvanic reflex, on one of these same individuals who was without conscious emotion, have obtained curves like those obtained from normal individuals with conscious emotions. They infer, therefore, co-conscious emotion in the abnormal case. This experiment has, however, merely confirmatory value for proofs otherwise obtained, since, by itself, 1 Prince, Morton. Experiments to Determine Co-conscious (Subconscious) Ideation. J. Abn. Psych., 3 (1908-9), p. 33. 2 Prince, M. An Experimental Study of the Mechanism of Hallucinations. Brit. J. Psych. (Med. Sec.), 2 (1922), p. 165. 3 Prince, M., anp Peterson, F. Experiments in Psychogalvanic Reaction from Co-conscious (Subconscious) Ideas in a Case of Multiple Personality. J. Abn. Psych., 3 (1908-9), p. 114. 4Junc, C. G. On Psycho-physical Relations of the Associative Experi- ment. J. Abn. Psych., 1 (1906-7), p. 247. 3Junc, C. G. The Associative Method. Am. J. Psych., 21 (1910), p. 219. 6 Martin, L. J. An Experimental Contribution to the Investigation of the Subconscious. Psych. Rev., 22 (1915), p. 251. 6 CHARLES T. BURNETT it does not inevitably require a larger hypothesis than that of ‘unconscious cerebration.” Let me here show the probative quality of Prince’s demonstra- tion, as I conceive it, since this has an important bearing on my own experiments. Exe. I. Hysterical subject B A, showing multiple personal- ity, of which one personality is called A and the other B. A has no knowledge of B, but B is completely aware of A. B hypno- tized is called b. B has no recollection of b. B is given the problem to calculate the number of seconds by the clock between two fixed points in time, which will be shown her when A comes again, the answer to be written automatically while A is present. A comes and is shown a paper containing the numbers 1.43 and 3.39 written one above the other at the top of a sheet of foolscap. The hand thereupon, wrote thus— “1.43 to 3.39 would be two hours less than”’ (sentence unfin- ished). 114 60 6840 ” A meanwhile was conversing and did not look at the paper while the hand wrote. The multiplication, be it observed, is correct, though the elapsed minutes were wrongly calculated. 3 Later B (and b) reported the event. This fact is not stated but is properly to be inferred from the author’s statement that ‘“B and b later explained that when doing a calculation co-con- sciously,” etc. (p. 40). A more serious omission in the pub-— lished account is the absence of any reference to the question whether, meanwhile, B had had access to any other source of knowledge of the original event than that event in actual process of occurring. Thus the memory part of the standard for acknowledging co-consciousness seems not to have been met quite scrupulously. Nor did the author state, so far as I see, 1 Prince, Morton. Experiments to Determine Co-conscious (Subconscious) Ideation. J. Abn. Psych., 3 (1908-9), p. 33. SPLITTING THE MIND 7 in this the first crucial experiment he had reported, the evidence that A did not know the content of the automatic episode. He might reply that it is to be found scattered in abundance through reports of similar cases, and is well enough known to investi- gators. But in the report of a critical experiment meant to solve a much controverted question, nothing logically essential should be omitted. Further, the record does not disclose whether in this experiment the writing was spontaneous or due to a post- hypnotic suggestion, nor to what extent, if at all, hypnosis was a feature of the procedure. A possibly meticulous criticism is here a compliment to the only crucial experiments in the field which I have found in print. As to other experiments of this sort made by him, he says: “A number of similar experiments in which the calculations were written automatically were made. The results were sub- stantially the same, the multiplication being always correct, though the elapsed minutes were wrong” (p. 40). The author does not state whether these were made on the same person or on others. Exp. II, on the same individual as Exp. 1: B was taught some dozen characters of a system of shorthand invented by the experi- menter and never seen before by B A. As soon as these were memorized the experimenter changed B to A. The experimenter then wrote a brief sentence involving the learned characters and showed it to A, “to whom it meant nothing” (p. 40). The hand promptly wrote automatically a correct translation. Again the author fails to state how he tested the dissociation during the writing; and he omits the memory part of the test. But conformity to Canons 1-3 of our standard seems to give to this experiment, as to the first one recounted, probative force. The remaining experiments recorded in Prince’s article, includ- ing those on a second abnormal individual (Miss Beauchamp), I do not here report, as they do not seem to satisfy the requirements of the standard. Turning now to Prince’s second article) with its report of experiments on a second abnormal individual, we note that his purpose was to prove that the origin of certain visual and 1 See footnote 2, p. 5. 8 CHARLES T. BURNETT auditory hallucinations, experimentally induced, was in subcon- scious (co-conscious) psychic states (p. 167). His experimental logic is again explicit. “The following procedure was devised: (a) to induce experimentally subconscious processes; (b) to ‘tap’ the subconscious process while in progress and obtain physical records of it; (c) if any hallucinations occurred syn- chronously to obtain a detailed description of the same; (d) to correlate by comparison if possible the imagery of the hallucina-_ tion with the ideas expressed in the written record of the: sub- conscious process; and (e) to obtain immediate evidence by subconscious introspection of the relation, if any, between the ~ elements of the subconscious process and the imagery of the hallucination and the mechanism of the same” (p. 168). These seem to be Canon 2 and, by implication, Canons 3 and 4 of our standard. The results of the experiments show that Prince obtained from his abnormal subject automatic writing purporting to report thoughts and images about data formerly experienced by her. Both the alleged mental process and the writing were — in fulfillment of a plan imposed by the experimenter. In various experiments the plans were severally (a) to write automatically - an account of some episode (not further specified) in her life; (b) to make up subconsciously and write automatically a story based on materials belonging to her one-time secondary person- ality; (c) to make up subconsciously and write automatically a story on any subject; (d) to write automatically some memory of an anxious kind; (e) to gaze into a crystal and write auto- matically any subconscious thoughts occurring during the crystal visions; (f) to select subconsciously and write auto- matically some sentence (not further specified) which was to appear thereupon consciously as a verbal auditory hallucination. These directions were given without hypnosis and, presumably, by word of mouth. Both consciousness and alleged subconscious- ness thus knew the plan; but consciousness did not know whether or how it was accomplished. These experiments were all success- fully carried out; and at the close of those of types (a)-(c) above, the observer by request wrote automatically what pur- ported to be an introspective account of just preceding subcon- SPLITTING THE MIND 9 scious experiences. The “ intelligent ’ character of the processes in question consists in recalling old data, inventing stories, invent- ing (or recalling) a sentence, and “ thinking ’—all according to plans accepted from the experimenter. The successful application of Canons 1-3 in these experiments seems to me to offer evidence for co-consciousness so significant as to be probative, though the data on which the alleged psychic processes operated had all been known previously to the observer. Prince’s report implies the successful application of the positive memory test (Canon 4), in his report of the content of the script and in his express reference to “a carefully worded question- naire . . . care being taken to suggest no leads or theories ” (p. 187); but as the protocol is not offered for examination we cannot form an independent judgment. Moreover, Prince was not primarily concerned with the application of Canon 4, but with obtaining evidence for subconscious knowledge of a causal relation between events in subconsciousness and hallucinations in consciousness. Here, then, we seem to have a small amount of adequate evi- dence, from two abnormal individuals, to prove the existence of co-consciousness. Can it be proved from evidence obtained from normal individuals? This was the object of my experiments. That object is, not to show the permanent existence nor the occasional, natural occurrence of co-consciousness in a normal individual, but that it can be artificially produced in such a one— all this in contrast with the occasional, or possibly permanent, natural occurrence in certain abnormal individuals, hitherto alone the concern of scientific inquiry. 3. SpEcIAL ConpITIONS AND METHOD oF THESE EXPERIMENTS The problem was brought into the laboratory in a variety of ways, each intended to reveal the existence and complexity of co-consciousness, if such there be. In all, the experimental method adopted was that of hypnosis and automatic writing— hypnosis to produce the necessary dissociation, automatic writing to furnish a means of communication with any discoverable co- consciousness. All the individuals whose experimental results 10 CHARLES T. BURNETT are here recorded—the ‘‘ observers ’’—were able to develop fairly deep states of hypnosis. The experiments fell naturally into two groups. The first is that of strictly probative experiments— those which seem to demonstrate conclusively the artificial pro- duction of co-consciousness in normal persons. These experi- ments meet the demands of the standard given on an earlier page. This required demonstration was yielded by three observers. While the reader is referred to the full exposition to come, a cursory anticipation may not be amiss to him here. A plan of action was given the observer in hypnosis (Hypnotic Stage 1 or Hyp. 1). It required for execution data and a special treatment of them. The data were often numbers; the treatment often that of such mathematical processes as addition, subtrac- tion, multiplication, and division; or the performance of a task according to the interpretation of data by a code agreed upon. The sources of the data were variously contrived to keep them unguessable. Sometimes they were given in Hypnotic Stage 1 (Hyp. 1), e.g., a number, while the remainder was to be found in the Interim Stage (1.e., the stage between two hypnoses—Int. ) | according to the plan given in Hypnotic Stage 1 (Hyp. 1), e.g., the number of shelves in a particular bookcase out of the many in the experimenting room. Or the entire data might be given in the Interim Stage (Int.)—e.g., numbers written unobtrusively on the corners of a sheet of paper which was being used by the ~ observer for some task both prescribed and executed during this stage (Prince’s Method); or, again, one number might be the number of the page which the observer, during the Interim Stage, was reading at the moment when some sign was given, and the other number might be the number of taps made unobtrusively by the experimenter. The possible variations are obviously many, The precise treatment to be given by the observer to the data was sometimes made to depend on some special character of the numbers found, e.g., their color, according, of course, to a code given in Hypnotic Stage 1 (Hyp. 1). Sometimes a continuous and direct exchange of communica- tions could be maintained between the writing hand and the experimenter, of the meaning of whose talk, if not the fact of it, SPLITTING THE MIND 11 the observer seemed unaware, ignoring him except as he was referred to by the recorder. The evidence for the performance was given sometimes by automatic writing in the same Interim Stage (Int.) ; sometimes vocally, just after the induction of a second hypnosis (Hypnotic Stage 2 [Hyp. 2]). It will be noted that the psychical functions of perception, con- trolled association, and expression are involved in the foregoing phenomena. Tests in the Interim Stage (Int.) showed ignorance of data, plan, and execution; Hypnotic Stage 2 (Hyp. 2), on the con- trary, showed full knowledge, when, meanwhile, no source of such knowledge, other than the original experience, was open; and sometimes this was retained in the Post-hypnotic Stage (Post-hyp.). Into a second group fall experiments that are confirmatory rather than strictly probative, in the matter at issue, viz., co-con- sciousness. These were for the greater part planned along the foregoing lines and need not be summarized in advance of their presentation in detail. Five observers furnished the experimental results here—the original three and two others. The object of the check experiments was (1) to test capacity for performing similar tasks without hypnosis and the dissociation effected thereby; and (2) to determine whether, if equal capacity were revealed, the hypothesis of a co-consciousness is unnecessary to interpret the facts obtained. The three chief observers were students taking the second or third year of instruction in psychology. The evidence of their normality is not in the form of a physician’s certificate; it is that of my own observation of their adaptation to life. I have known them for three or four years, for most of that time in frequent personal contact with them as my students. I have seen them in the general life of a small college and in the social life of my home. In none of them have I seen any nervous stigmata. J. L. B. has a good war record. In college he was a leading debater, a member of the ’varsity fencing team, played football, engaged in dramatics, and was a leader in his fraternity. He took 12 CHARLES T. BURNETT active part in social life. On graduation he went into business. His age at the time of experiment was 21-22. G. E. H. was an editor of the college newspaper and was fond of social life. He had a keen and scholarly mind, being a mem- ber of the Phi Beta Kappa, receiving his degree with a magna, and being awarded one of our scholarships for graduate work. He is at the time of writing engaged in graduate study in Psy-. chology and Philosophy at Harvard University. His age at the time of experiment was 19-20. . H. W. L. was an editor of the college annual. He took an active part in social interests, and engaged in dramatics. He is now a student of medicine at the Johns Hopkins University. His age at the time of experiment was 21. Two other men, first year students in psychology, contributed a small amount of confirmatory evidence. P. J. was quarter- back on the ’varsity and a member of the musical clubs. His age at the time of the experiments was 20. F. W. A. was an editor of the college literary magazine and a leading debater. His age at the time of the experiment was 20. Let these details furnish such objective basis as they can for my judgment that these observers were normal. These five men were obtained from some eight or ten, who, requested that they might be tried out in preliminary tests. No one was urged nor even asked to take part; the opportunity was made known. Not much time was spent on any one of these volunteers, when dissociation was not pretty readily induced, except in the case of J. L. B. He was at first refractory but later proved to be an excellent observer. In the conduct of nearly all the separate experiments three per- sons were employed at the same time—the experimenter (E), the observer (O), and the recorder (R). No more than one person at a time was in hypnosis. The records were made by R in long- hand, with some modifications for speed and brevity. The instructions given to O in Hypnotic Stage 1 were uttered distinctly and slowly, then repeated once in like manner ; and at the close of this repetition O was asked, Do you understand? He would reply by a nod or a spoken word, usually the latter. SPLITTING THE MIND 13 There was never an occasion to give the directions a third time, as O always professed to understand. The arrangements for automatic writing occasionally involved placing a pencil in the concealed writing hand, but O sometimes picked up the pencil without aid. The writing was always badly formed, but improved somewhat as the experiments progressed. As in ordinary script, m’s were sometimes incompletely formed. E had to keep watch to see that the paper was kept under the pencil and that later words were not superposed on earlier. Some- times on reaching the margin, the hand would shift of its own accord. During the moving of the paper, the pencil sometimes remained on the paper and sometimes was lifted spontaneously. The use of a magnifying glass aided greatly in cases of doubtful interpretation, both as to characters written and the sequence of words, as the pencil was often not lifted from the paper in passing from word to word. A faint mark could many times be detected between words written in immediate sequence. FE has tried very carefully to be objective in his interpretation of the recorded data. The tests for anaesthesia of the concealed writing hand were conducted in the following way: O, having closed his eyes, was ready, whenever he felt himself touched anywhere, to report the fact at once with a “yes.” FE then applied finger or other blunt stimulus to hands, arms, thighs, and legs, mixing freely the tests of the writing hand and arm with those of other parts. In some experiments a sharp stimulus was used for the writing hand, to provide new material for discrimination and report on the part of the hypothetical co-consciousness. O was never told what sort of touch stimulus to expect on any part. After he was once prepared to expect the beginning of his test, he was given no further warning for any later stage of the same test. He was also kept in ignorance as to the correctness of his replies. Each observer reported that he felt “ normal,” that is, he was in his usual condition of felt well-being, when he undertook a given experiment. The method of hypnotizing employed was a combination of the so-called physical and psychical methods, viz., of eye fixation on a bright object, and verbal suggestion, followed, when the eyelids 14 CHARLES T. BURNETT closed heavily, by stroking and continued verbal suggestions. In the latter, emphasis was laid on creating a vivid imagination or ‘picture ”’ of sleep in O’s mind, or of bodily heaviness and muscu- lar relaxation. FE insisted also that O maintain deep and regular breathing. When hypnosis had been induced, the suggestion was always given that O would feel quite fit and ready for the remaining duties of the day when awaking; and that no one would | be able to hypnotize him against his will. There was never any difficulty in terminating hypnosis and almost never any delay in accepting the suggestion to waken. O was usually asked after an experiment whether he felt all right. He almost invariably replied in the affirmative at once. The one or two exceptional instances and the nature of the mild discomfort are indicated in the reports of experiments. The only instances not there entered were of two persons who never yielded results of sufficient value to be included. One of these, being somewhat nervous, said, shortly after the first attempt to induce hypnosis, that he felt faint. Work was at once stopped with him and no further attempt ever made by E to resume it. The other person stated that his eyes had felt uncomfortable after a previous hypnosis, and requested that the eye-fixation factor of induction be omitted. E of course acceded at once to the request. PARTE tT PROBATIVE EXPERIMENTS EXPERIMENT 1. Jan. 19, 1920, 3:30 p.m. Dee Os ON 5 | ned Ot id WA Hypnoric Stace 1: O was told in hypnosis that E would give him a problem in the addition of three numbers, that he would awake on hearing the third number, and that he would give the answer at once on being rehypnotized. No amnesic suggestion was made. After a repetition of these directions, the numbers were given as follows: 27, 97, 82. O awakened at once as directed. INTERIM STAGE‘: Being set at automatic writing he produced the following. In this repro- duction, and in all similar cases hereafter, the vertical lines indicate ends -of lines in the original script, and the dots illegible parts. Was to+ (Here follows a rude five-pointed star and an irregular crescent- shaped figure) add 3 nur 3 numbers |and nd give the | answer when rehy | hy(p)notised me they were|The probl| (There is a large indecipherable conglomerate traced faintly around the two preceding words. A new sheet begins here.) Jf you really wanted me to do it | I can do it but if you | don’t I (c)ant. If you would|let me I would . . . why|. . .|why (A new sheet begins here.) 97, 27, 82. You said to give you the | answer I can’t t tell | you because I know you don’t want (These last two words are superposed.) me too|want|I want to do it butI . . .|to and I can do . |tf you | told me me| you want . . . If | But I can do it E meanwhile talked undisturbedly with O on various subjects irrelevant to the experiment. Questioned about his right hand, O was not aware that it was doing anything. Anaesthesia of that hand below the wrist developed spontaneously after some minutes of writing, as shown by tests with metal point and by pinching. When shown this hand, O could immediately feel touches upon it. It seemed colder than the left to E; and O rubbed it afterward, saying it felt clammy. Being questioned as to what occurred in Hypnotic Stage 1, O recalled everything except the specific character of the problem. Being asked why he could not, he replied that he did not want to, but that he knew from past experience that, if he should try, he would fail. . Hypnotic STAGE 2: After a brief pause O said 206 (correct). E: Why did you say that? O: Because you wanted me to give the sum ‘of some numbers. E: What numbers? O: 27, 50 (then, in succession, each after the third being meant to supersede the third) 98, 89, 92, 42 (resting on the latter). 1 All matter in ( ) inserted into the automatic record by the experimenter. 15 16 CHARLES T. BURNETT E: How did you get the numbers? O: You gave them. E: Why hesitate on the third? O: I couldn’t remember what it was.. E: What were you doing while sitting at the table? O: Nothing. (Then,. after a pause) Writing. E: When did you do this sum? O: At the table. E: What were you writing? O: Wasn’t writing. (Then after a pause) Yes, I was writing—writing the numbers. E: What else? O: Telling you why I couldn’t tell you about the writing. These answers came with apparent effort. “ bes Viasked) Baws Domit want to say what I do,” replied O. E: How could you deny that you were aware of writing? O: Paid no attention. E: When were you doing the problem? O: When we were talking. E: How could you? O: Doesn’t seem as if I could, but I was. O’s appearance showed marked alteration between forgetfulness any recall, with some confusion at times evident. Post-HYPNOTIC STAGE: O could recall nothing from Hypnotic Stage 2. Probative character of this experiment: O performed a task, viz., writing intelligently, which, by the usual standards of life, involved mental functions. He was, meanwhile, not aware of so doing and was, indeed, engaged in carrying on conversation undisturbedly on topics disconnected with the task. Later, he recalled the details of this performance, though, meanwhile, he had had access to no source of information outside himself. Associative relations among the several stages and subgroups: Hyp. 1 persists in part in the voice-group of Int.; and also in the hand-group, with no evidence of incompleteness. The two groups show no connection with each other. The voice-group loses kinaesthetic and touch sensations from the hand. Whether these persist with the hand-group does not appear, except possibly by inference. But visual sensations, belonging to the voice-group (sight of right hand) bring back the other inhibited sensations of that member. The voice group is affected by inhibitions from Hyp. 1. Hyp. 2 has not quite recovered from the dissociations and inhibitions of Int.; the associations are unstable; but it seems, however, largely to include that stage with Hyp. 1. The original numbers are still partly inhibited. Post-hyp. seems wholly dissociated from Hyp. 1. Other pertinent questions about these relations receive no» answer in the records of this experiment. . SPLITTING THE MIND 17 EXPERIMENT 2. Jan. 31, 1920, 4:30 p.m. Ora Geta tH. Eis) Gere Be Re ls Bk Hypnotic Stace 1: Directions to O: You will be given a problem of three numbers. You will add the first two and substract from their sum the third number. You will awaken on hearing the third number. When you are rehypnotized, as soon as you think of the numbers you will lift your hand; and you will give the answer as soon as you are able. After repetition of these directions in the usual fashion, the following numbers were given: 29, 56, 67. O wakened at once and took his place at the writing table. INTERIM STAGE: When questioned O said that he recalled nothing from the preceding stage. E began a discussion about dreams. Later he asked O to name the countries surrounding the Pacific Ocean. O replied correctly and in some detail, naming islands correctly, as well as divisions of Australia and capitals of some of them. He discussed primitive peoples and defined anthropology. This was all done without signs of effort. Meanwhile his hand wrote as follows: . . . I have to add two numbers | which were 29, 67 (An 8 seems faintly superposed on the 7.) . . . to take away 67 . . . the (?) : ‘was | answer was 18 I am to give the | answer (?) when. I am to give you the answer | when I giv (?) rehypnatised (O's spelling) and also | when I think of them I am to raise my hand | and give you (end of sheet reached). The back and fingers of the writing hand were anaesthetic to the sharp point of a compass. Questioned about his right hand, O replied, that it was on the table, doing nothing, just resting on the table. Being told to think about that hand he found it difficult to do so; the writing stopped and the anaesthesia disappeared. When told that he had been writing he could not recall the act, but said he guessed it had happened. He made clear that this was merely an inference on his part. Hypnotic StTAcE 2: Being put to sleep O almost immediately* raised his hand and _ said “eighteen’’ (correct). Asked what he had been doing, he named the topics of conversation and said that this was all. Afterward he added that E had been touching his arm. (The record here is unfortunately ambiguous. Taken strictly, “arm” may mean either the right or left, as undoubtedly both were touched, in accordance with E’s usual practice in such tests. This singling out of arm instead of leg, which was also included in the test, seems to point to some specially felt ground of distinction, such as an original anaesthesia might have conferred. Yet in this case “hand” should have been specified, as the anaesthesia did not exist above the wrist. The fault is evidently that of E in not drawing out further introspection from O on this point.) Asked “what else,” he replied “ nothing.” Here E observed that O’s right hand was again making writing movements, the eyes being closed. The record obtained was the following: which you told me to do I am|to do as you told me|to do when I was rehypnotized the first | time Badger (the recorder) is not to add these up | While I am 1It is hard to choose the exact phrase here and in other similar cases, because it is difficult to tell the moment when hypnosis has been induced. 18 CHARLES T. BURNETT again (?) | hypnotized . . . and the whole thing is to be done by m(e) | (Here the writing runs off the paper as weil as at the beginning of the next liries)i) Ypwiee es aAStut) GOL) 0) GOmGe) Being questioned O said he was doing nothing. E finding that the writing hand was anaesthetic to touch, asked O to think about that hand; whereupon the anaesthesia disappeared. Asked again what he was doing, he replied “writing”; and that he now knew that E had been touching him but that he did not know it at the time, “did not feel it then.” O went on to say that the hand was writing the same as before. E: What was that? O: About the problem I had to do. Continuing, he said that he already , knew the result, but did not know when he did it. (Both of these assertions are ambiguous and E can now only speculate on their meaning.) When writ- ing he did not know that he was doing so, but does now; could not feel touches at the time, but remembers them now. “ The rest of me couldn’t feel it.” The suggestion was given that on awaking he would remember all about it. Post-HYPNOTIC STAGE: O feels as though he had been dreaming. Asked to make the attempt to recall, he says that he was told to recall, but can’t remember what he was to recall. After some difficulty he remembers that he had recalled writing, not the act, but that he said he had been writing; also that he had told the subject matter, but could not now recall what it was. O remembers that E had touched his hand at those times when O, at the time, had said so; but at no others. He cannot recall where he was nor the presence of anyone except E. He has a slight feeling as though there were some things he can’t recall. Now, he begins to forget still more, though he can still remember that he was told to recall, and what he has already said (i.e., during Post-hyp.), but nothing else. Probative character of these results: We find here in the Interim Stage the production of seemingly intelligent automatic writing, showing correct solution of a simple mathematical prob-_ lem (one too complicated to be solved before O awoke from Hyp. 1, as shown by Check Exp. 1), while O was engaged also in com- plex conversation that required careful attention, and while pro- fessing to think that the hand, which was in fact writing, was merely resting. We find also within Hyp. 2, (1) the production of intelligent automatic writing, of which, at first, O professes ignorance, as well as of the stimulus applied to the writing hand; (2) the later recall of the content of the writing and the stimulus of the hand, though meanwhile no information has come to O from outside sources. Associative relations among the several stages and subgreups: In Int. there is dissociation of hand-group from voice-group. This is not very stable. When the voice-group “‘ attends to” the SPLITTING THE MIND 19 writing hand (1.e., develops voluntary images ot the hidden hand) it recovers the lost sensations, but O finds it hard to do this. Hyp. 1 is dissociated from the voice-group but not from the hand-group. Hyp. 2 is at first, according to all evidence that is free from ambiguity, a mere continuance of the inwardly dissociated Int. At first, associations with the voice-group appear alone; but the persistence of the hand-group appears thus: Hyp. 2 (or as we might perhaps now more clearly say), the voice-group of this Stage 2, denies further knowledge of the hand-group; but the automatic writing appears once more, reporting again correctly the matters recorded in the earlier writing. Then comes an increas- ing integration of the two groups. The touches on the right hand and the contents of the writing are shared. The recovered unification is expressed by O in a phrase referring to the previous dissociation: “The rest of me couldn’t feel it.” Part of the hand-group, viz., that concerned with problem solving, is not recovered. The associative relations of Hyp. 2 to Hyp. 1 are shown in the completion of the task assigned in the latter, and in the continued reference to the task in the writing. The vocalized answer to the problem and the hand raising are not referred to during the remainder of Stage 2, an omission rather surprising in view of all that O does report on. Perhaps there was something about the act of vocalizing in response to the original suggestion that was—shall we say—distasteful, which determined its immediate dissociation from the remaining items of this stage. Pertinent facts will be adduced on this point from later experiments. Post- hyp. shows incomplete and unstable associations with Hyp. 2 and none with earlier stages. The suggestion had been given in the preceding stage that all would be recalled in this. At first, Hyp. 2 is recalled vaguely (O feels that he has been dreaming). Then (after O has been urged to effort) lost items from the preceding stage are recalled (viz., that he had been told to recall something ). Then, with further effort, O recalls telling what he had written, but cannot recall what its content was. He has a vague feeling of yet more unrecalled. Even as he talks he begins to forget again. 20 CHARLES T. BURNETT EXPERIMENT 3. April 13, 1920, 2:30 p.m. O72 (GEA S. Hess Coven B: Re eel Be (This was the second experiment upon this observer at this session.) Hypnotic Stace 1: Directions to O: You will multiply two numbers. The first is 85. The second is the number of shelves in the book-case to the right of the door. (This number was 6. O’s eyes were, of course, closed at this time, but the book-case was near by and in full view from his chair.) When you get the second number you will at once fall into hypnosis, giving the. answer as soon as possible, and raising your hand the moment you. begin to think of the problem. (These directions were repeated; then) “Do you understand? (Affirmative reply.) A copy of Aesop’s Fables, opened, was then put into his hands. He was told that, on awakening, he would begin at once to read the left-hand page. He was given an amnesic suggestion for the events of Hyp. 1. INTERIM STAGE: Awakened, he began to read at once, well and intelligently. Stopping at the end of a page, he was told to finish the fable. E: Why did you stop at the bottom of the page? O: I don’t know why. I did so naturally. It must have been a post-hypnotic suggestion. (This behavior was probably in strict accord with the form of the suggestion, although not so intended by E.) E: What can you recall from your previous hypnosis? O: Nothing. E: Try. O: Nothing. O was then tested for suggestibility. Being told that he could not lift head, put hand down, open mouth, etc., he did them all. Being told that he could not help saying 80 (chosen because of its connection with the original suggestion) on seeing O take out a watch, he did not say it; yet he resisted with some apparent effort; and he afterward acknowledged that he wanted to say it. E: Do you recall anything? O: No. E: Do you feel perfectly normal? O: Yes. E had observed that early in Int. O had turned his shoulder toward the book-shelves, in such a way as to exclude them from his immediate field of view. So wondering why O was not executing the original suggestion, E continued to test O’s suggestibility in several ways, till resistance seemed - to require some effort, though it was always successfully made. When told he could not move a certain member he would sometimes reply that he did not want to. O was now told to turn his head; he did so to the left (away from the shelves). Noting the obvious reluctance to turn toward the right, E told him to turn the head all around. Pausing a moment, O then gave it a big twist away round to the left. He was now told directly to move his head to the right. He did so with ample motion and speed so great that he need not have seen the shelves at all—much more rapidly than in turning the other way. Finally, “ Move your head slowly to the right.” He obeyed: and Hypnotic STAGE 2: instantly dropping back into the chair with closed eyes, he raised his hand SPLITTING THE MIND 21 and said 510 (correct). Tests for suggestibility now showed that O was in hypnosis. E: Why did you lift your hand a few moments ago? O: When was that? E: A little while ago. O: Oh yes, I thought of a problem. E: What were you doing? O: Doing problem while my hand was raised. E: Before that? O: Looking at book-shelves. E: Before that? O: Moving hands (referring evidently to the tests for suggestibility in Int.). E: Why did you move your head to the right so hurriedly at first? O: I was afraid to see the book-case. E: Why? O: I didn’t know that was why. E: (Persists in asking why.) O: On seeing book-case I would go to sleep; and I didn’t want to then because I was talking with you. But I didn’t know that was why. Post-HYPNOTIC STAGE: O states that he remembers no events of Hyp. 2 nor the fact of falling asleep (1.e., in Stage 2). He resists suggestions easily. Being pressed for further recollections, he offers a few vague memories of Int. that feel to him indistinct and confused. He remembers talking, as in a dream, and is not very sure of even that. He feels as though he had before been going through the limb movements he had just been making (i.e., resisting by movement the suggestions of motor paralysis). But all these things seem less real than, for example, his going to R’s room at the beginning of the afternoon. Moving arms, legs and head is all he can recall. E: How? O: Slowly. E: Remember anything else? O: That is all. E: What way did you move your head? O: Both ways. E: Did you have control? O: I think I did. E: Do you recall anything else you have done this afternoon? O: Yes, reading fables. (This was done in the Interim Stage of an earlier experiment on this same afternoon and was recalled in the Post-hypnotic Stage of that experiment. It is thus not necessary to interpret the present memory as a reference to the present experiment.) To check up the point as to whether O had known the number of shelves in advance of the experiment, E asked him two days later how many shelves there were. He replied that he did not know. He stated also that he had no memory of having had anything,to do with them in hypnosis, though he remembered being told that they had sent him off into that state. He did not recall ever having noticed their number before the experiment. Probative character of this experiment: The evidence for co- consciousness consists in the following: O professes in Int. to recall nothing from Hyp. 1. His actions, however, are appar- ently affected by resistance to the suggestion given in the latter stage. In Hyp. 2 he has become aware of the resistance present in Int., though he has had no outside information. Telling of it, he adds he was not at the time of this occurrence aware of the 22 CHARLES T. BURNETT meaning of his acts, viz., that they were of the nature of resistance. Associative relations among the several stages and subgroups: Hyp. 1 is entirely dissociated from the voice-group of Int., but not from the resistance-group, while the latter is dissociated wholly from the voice-group. Int. as a whole is in full associative relation with Hyp. 2, and so is Hyp. 1, as far as the carrying out: of the original suggestion is concerned. From Post-hyp. are dissociated both of the preceding hypnotic stages, and there is only fragmentary association with Int. EXPERIMENT 4. April 30, 1920, 3:30 p.m. ORE W RIS Bee Gates: Ret Gee aie (This experiment immediately followed another upon the same observer. ) Hypnotic Stace 1: Directions to O: You will add two numbers. The first is 639. When I give you the second you will waken at once and write the answer auto- matically. You will not remember what I have now said. (Directions repeated; then) Do you understand? (Affirmative reply.) The second number is 427. (O wakens at once.) INTERIM STAGE: E: What do you remember? O: About my writing—a lot about the writing (referring evidently to experiences in the preceding experiment on the same afternoon)—that’s all. O seats himself at the table, right hand behind screen. It writes at once upon taking up the pencil 1066 (correct), and repeats the number very > many times. The second time it appears as 10 followed by a 6 reversed (mirror writing), and then two 6’s correctly made. This extensive repetition was not a part of the original suggestion so far as E is aware or the records indicate. O states that his right hand feels colder and more numb than the other. ; E: What are you doing? O: Moving the hand, as I usually do when I hold a pencil. Tests of anaesthesia were negative. The account as given above shows that exploration for awareness of the real meaning of the hand movements was not as extensive as it properly should have been; but it seems not improper to assume, that had O known what he was really doing he would have said so in reply to the last question. Hypnotic STAGE 2: : What were you doing when sitting at the table? O: Writing. : What? O: 1066 (correct). : What is that? O: The answer to the problem you gave me (correct). : When did you perform the problem? O: Don’t know. : (After a pause) Can you think now when you performed it? O: No. ; eoResMeoMeoBes SPLITTING THE MIND 23 E: Did you perform it before you sat down in the writing chair? O: Don’t know. E: Did you perform it before you awoke? O: I woke up when you gave me the second number. E: Why didn’t you tell me what your hand was writing? O: Didn’t know it was writing. E: How do you know now? O: Don’t know. (Presumably, in view of other statements by O, this was not intended as a denial that he knew that he had been writing, but rather as a denial that he knows how he knows.) E: Do you know you wrote it? O: Think I did. E: Do you recall actually writing it (i.e., the act in process)? O: No. Yet he had already stated, without access to information outside himself, that he had been writing. This seems to indicate fluctuating associative connection between the hand-group of Int. and Hyp. 2. E: Are you asleep or awake now? O: Awake. E: If awake, why can’t you take your arms off the chair? (O cannot lift his arms from the chair.) Can you when awake? O: Yes. E: You are going to begin to laugh now. (O does so.) You are laughing on one side of your face and weeping on the other. (Not well carried out, the weeping effect predominating, but without tears here and below.) E: Now are you asleep or awake? O: Don’t know. E: How does your present state feel? O: I’m very comfortable. E: Why don’t you know whether you are asleep or awake? QO: I thought IT was awake. E: You will be sad and weep. (O accepts the suggestion.) E: Are you comfortable now? O: No. E: What are you weeping about? O: I don’t know. E: Do you feel comfortable? O: I don’t know. (See reference to this in Post-hyp.) E: You are not weeping; you're laughing. (O does so.) E: Will you tell us the joke? O: I don’t know what it is; I just feel good. ; E: You are putting this on. O: I’m not. E: This is acting, isn’t it? O: No. E: You are laughing because your left hand is a humpty-dumpty. O: (Laughing more than ever) It feels like an egg. He is next told that he can open his eyes, but remain asleep. He is then given the suggestion to see a motto over the door. It is not accepted. Being told that his hand looks like chalk, he agrees. Post-HYPNOTIC STAGE: E: What do you remember? O: Weeping. laughing. E: What were you laughing at? O: Nothing, as I remember. E: Did you feel very much amused? O: Yes—more so than I usually do when I laugh. Being told to look at the chair-arm, he recalls the humpty-dumpty. He also reports that he felt terribly when weeping. E: Wasn’t that crying acting? O: No. It seemed as if something terrible had happened; and I felt all broken up over it. He reports, further, that being asked, while weeping, whether he was comfortable, this word did not seem to have any meaning for him. This perhaps indicates the depth of his absorption in the suggestion. The fore- going account indicates that E did not explore fully for memories of Int. 24 CHARLES T. BURNETT Probative character of this experiment: We have here the execution of a mathematical task according to a plan while the individual is apparently unaware of so doing. Yet later, without information meanwhile from any source outside himself, he reports what he has done. Associative relations among the several stages and subgroups: Hyp. 1 is associated with the hand-group of Int., but not with the voice-group. It is also associated with Hyp. 2. There is no evidence as to whether it survives in Post-hyp. In Int. the hand- group is partly dissociated from the voice-group, 1.e., so far as the meaning of the right hand movements is concerned. About the reverse relation between these groups there is no evidence. Both are associated with Hyp. 2, when they are reunited. The latter is associated, in turn, with Post-hyp. Comments: (1) The chief experimental defect in the fore- going is, perhaps, the failure to explore still further O’s apparent unawareness in Int. of the meaning of his right hand movements. (2) The ease with which the problem was solved is worth noting. The testimony of O implies that it took place during Int., and by - the promptness with which he wrote the answer on picking up the pencil, the latest limit is set. During that period he was mak- ing the usual effective social adjustment to E in the matter of question and answer. As to his ability to make such a com- plicated adjustment, without the aid of hypnosis, the series of — experiments affords no answer—a regrettable omission. (3) The kind of resemblance between hypnosis and the normal state is not introspectively clear to O, as shown by his change from certainty to doubt, while E plied him with suggestions. At first he declares himself ‘ awake”; at the last he doesn’t know. (4) Emotions of some apparent strength can be aroused in hypnosis, with little or no ideational content (representing no definite object toward which the emotion is directed). EXPERIMENT 5. May 4, 1920, 4 p.m. Os GHEE: Hi, tome, Cod Riek, Ee Hypnotic STAGE 1: Directions to O: I am going to give you two numbers. The first is 93. The second I will give you on a piece of paper when you waken. If it SPLITTING THE MIND 25 appears in ink of one color, add it to the first number; if in ink of two colors, subtract it from the first. (Directions repeated carefully; then) Do you understand? (Affirmative reply.) INTERIM STAGE: E: Can you tell me what has happened? O: I don’t know; I can’t remember, E: What is the best you can make of this I-don’t-remember? O: I can’t make anything of it. I can’t remember because I have nothing to connect it with. E: Are you willing to make an effort? O: I haven’t anything to put any effort on. E: Is it like trying to report what is on the fourth street on the right, up from the harbor of Canton (taken as an example of matters utterly unknown to O)? O: Yes, I have nothing to put any effort on. O now takes his place at the table. The writing hand is not anaesthetic. E: Do you feel sleepy? O: No. E: Do you feel as if there was something on your mind? O: No, I feel rather dreamy; I can’t think of many things. To O is now shown a card with 57 on it in red and black. E: What does it recall? ©O: A card I saw once before with red and black numbers on it. E: Nothing else? O: No. E: Are you telling me the truth? O: Yes. E: Does it bother you to have me ask that? O: No. O’s writing is now in progress. Tests show that the writing hand is anaesthetic. Being given a book. O reads rapidly aloud, while his hand makes the figures 36 (correct) over and over again, filling a sheet. E: What are you doing with your right hand? O: Nothing. O gives an account of the content of his reading. Tests for suggestibility show that the head and left hand are completely resistant, but that the right hand yields, showing paralysis, movement, and inability to stop movement, according to the word of E. O is aware of all this. (“That is because my right hand feels differently than it usually does.”) E: The sight of that hand will put you to sleep. O falls asleep at once and is helped back to the easy chair. Hypnotic STAGE 2: O tells what he has been talking about, what he wrote, and says that the latter was the answer to the problem given him. Here a fellow-worker of O in the laboratory, well known to him, comes to the door to speak to E. Being questioned about this, O replies that he knew some one came, but not who it was. The door was very near O, but his eyes were closed. He is well oriented in time, guessing the hour within fifteen minutes too early. O is given the suggestion to recall all when he awakes. E: Did you know I touched your (right) hand? O: I know now you did. E: How? O: Because I remember it. E: How can you remember now and not have known it then? O: I wasn’t thinking of it then. E: Were you feeling normal then? O: No, not quite normal. I kept thinking of one thing, that is, whatever I was looking at. E: Are you asleep or awake now? O: I'll call it asleep. E: What is it? O: It is really being asleep. 26 CHARLES T. BURNETT E: Now when you wake up I want you to remember what has taken place. Do you think you can do it? Is it an effort to do it? O: Yes. E: I want you to tell me what the effort consists in, when you wake up. , You will awaken when I rap three times. Post-HYPNoTIC STAGE: E: Can you remember? O: I suppose so, but I don’t really want to; it’s such a hard thing to do. I don’t want to say what it was. It’s hard to say. I remember sitting at the table then and writing the number 36 and being touched on the hand. E: What else do you remember? O: Telling you I didn’t feel quite - normal when I sat in the chair. E: Now you are going to tell me in what the effort consists. O: First in trying to remember and then in trying to say it. E: Is it comparable to anything else? O: Like some Gunteniae thing you try to forget. E: The writing? O: No, the remembering. E: The content, or the trying to remember? O: I guess it must be trying to remember, not the content. E: Is it like learning a lot of Latin verses if you hated to learn the Latin and hated to hear it spoken? O: Yes. E: Have you ever felt that way before? O: Yes. After I say it, it seems to be off my mind, but I wouldn’t want to say it again. E: Emotionally, how does it seem to you? O: I dislike to think about it. E: Do you know why? O: No. E: Have you felt similarly in similar experiences? O: Yes. E: Do you now feel different from the way you felt in this chair (the one at the table)? O: Now I can think of everything; then I felt sort of dreamy. E: How did you feel about your right hand (t.e., when it seemed inde- pendent of O’s control)? O: I didn’t feel as if it were mine. E: Was it hard to think of the whole experience? O: Yes, both the chair experience and the writing. E: How do you feel now? O: Relieved from the ordeal. I feel better when I forget it all. It seems disagreeable when I am awake and remember it because it is so inconsistent. Probative character of this experiment: O performs a problem in subtraction after deciding whether, according to the color code agreed upon, the figures call for subtraction or addition, and he writes the answer, professing, at the same time, to be unaware of it all and of what he had been originally told to do. While recording the answer over and over, he is reading a text with such understanding as to be able to report on it afterward. Ina later stage he recalls both groups of facts, without, meanwhile, having received any outside information. Associative relations among the several stages and subgroups: Hyp. 1 is dissociated from the voice-group of Int., but not from SPLITTING THE MIND 27 the hand-group, nor from Hyp. 2. In Int. the hand-group is dissociated from the voice-group (except for a certain area of experience which is apparently shared, 1.e., the visual) ; but we find no evidence that enables us to assert to what extent, if at all, the voice-group is dissociated from the hand-group. Both of these are associated with Hyp. 2 and Post-hyp. Hyp. 2 also is associated with Post-hyp. Comments: The following subsidiary facts, indicated in this experiment, are worth bringing together for easy availability: (1) Int. was not normal. O felt dreamy, monoideic. (2) The right hand was not anaesthetic when tested prior to the writing. (3) O explains this anaesthesia by saying, “ I wasn’t thinking of it (the touch) then.” ‘I know now you did.” (4) He is not quite sure whether to call the hypnotic state one of sleep, but finally accepts that characterization. (5) How shall the felt difficulties in recalling the events of Int. be regarded? O informs us that effort is involved in two things—trying to remember and trying to say it, as if it were something unpleasant that one would gladly forget. He has felt the same way in other similar experi- ments. The form of his report seems to indicate on the one hand honesty in his introspection during Int., and on the other the discomfort of confusion in logical processes. There is no evi- dence of concern lest anyone should think him lying. (6) While in hypnosis, and not occupied with the execution of detailed sug- gestions, O obtained new sensory material and was oriented in time. (7) The dissociation in Int. is clearly pointed out in post- hypnotic recall by O’s statement that the writing hand, anaesthetic while executing special suggestions, did not feel as if it were his. EXPERIMENT 6. May 20, 1920, 3:30 p.m. Oat. WL: | CA Ce WO 2 Re Ge is,) Et. Hypnotic STAGE 1: Directions to O: I am going to give you a problem. You are to multiply two numbers. The first is the number in the right-hand corner of the book page which you are looking at when I ask you to hand me a book. The second is the number of taps you hear me make while you are looking at the book. The answer you will write automatically without knowing you are doing so. (Directions repeated as usual; then) Do you understand? 28 CHARLES T. BURNETT (Affirmative reply.) O then woke according to the suggestion that he would do so when asked to sit in another chair. INTERIM STAGE: E: Do you remember what has been happening? O: I can’t remember anything. E: What is it like? O: A blank. E: Are you asleep or awake? O: Awake, I guess. Tests for suggestibility are negative. Being handed an open book of Aesop’s Fables, he is asked to look for a page containing three fables. While O is searching, E makes three taps and takes the book away (at p. 41). By request O then repeats some verses that he knows by heart (“ Bowdoin Beata”) and does so easily, without obvious distraction. At the same time his right hand is writing over and over again 123 (correct), usually in a column, but occasionally in a row. (Five times, scattered through a series of thirty-seven, 133 appears instead.) Tests for anaesthesia of writing hand are now positive. E: What are you doing? O: Nothing. E: What do you hear? O: A pencil. (O’s pencil was making a very perceptible noise.) E: Whose? O: May be George’s (R) pen. E: Are you awake or asleep? O: Awake. (O acts very sleepy, but refuses motor suggestions. ) E: What is your right hand doing? O: Nothing. He is then told that he cannot hold his eyes open, and he thereupon falls asleep. He returns to the easy chair. Hypnotic STAGE 2: E: What have you been doing? O: Nothing. E: Why didn’t you tell me when you were writing? O: I didn’t know I was writing. E: Did you hear noise of a pencil? O: Yes. E: Why did you say it was George’s pencil? O: Because he was writing. E: Did you feel my touches on your hand? O: No. E: On your arm? O: Yes. E: Did you really not feel them at all on your hand? O: All I felt were on my arm. E: Do you recall now feeling them on your hand? O: Can’t seem to think. E: Were you awake or asleep while writing? O: Awake. E: How did you feel when I told you you couldn’t do certain things? O: Felt sleepy. E: Like falling into hypnosis? O: Yes. E: What were you writing? O: 123. E: What was that? O: Answer to problem. E: What was the problem? O: Multiply number on the upper right-hand corner of page you handed me by number of taps. E: Do you remember any of the fables on that page? O: One about a wolf (correct). ° E: Were you aware, at the time, of looking for the number of the taps? O-8No: i E: When did you do the problem? O: \Right after you took the book. E: Were you aware of doing the problem? O: No. SPLITTING THE MIND 29 E: Were you thinking of anything else while repeating Bowdoin Beata? O: No. I felt sleepy all the time. E: More so than usual? O: Yes. E: More than you do now? O: Yes. E: Can you wake up now if you want to? O: I think so. E: Do you have any such difficulty in speaking as George had (referring to peculiar features of an earlier experiment reported in this monograph as Bscpat ire O. Nav E: Yes you do. O: No, I don’t. E: Yes you do. Here O works his face as if trying to speak, but utters nothing. E: You can’t say your name. (O makes an unsuccessful effort.) E: Can you recall what it is? (O nods.) E: But you can’t say it? (O shakes his head. His right hand moves as though writing. Thereupon he is made to sit once more at the table with his hand behind the screen. His replies, recorded in the following dialogue, were given in writing.) E: Why can’t you say it? O: You told me I had the same trouble as George. E: Can you think how to say it? O: Yes. E: How? (O writes his name.) B= Can’t you utter it? O: No. E: Have you seen anyone with this difficulty before? O: Yes. Fea DO PU OM Gk fo. css FL Sass (correct). E: Now your difficulty is removed. (O speaks his name, and writing stops.) E: Can you answer questions now? O: Yes. E: Why couldn’t you before? O: Couldn’t speak. E: Did you try to? O: Yes. E: What prevented it? O: Don’t know. E: Do you want to wake up? O: Don’t care. E: Are you comfortable? O: Yes. E: What are you thinking about? O: Nothing. E: How did you get the solution of your problem? O: I heard three taps; and as soon as I got the number from the top of the book I multiplied them. E: As you do ordinarily? O: Yes. E: You will start to take your fountain pen from your pocket, and when you do, it will waken you. Do you hear any noise now? O: (After a long pause, though the sound is easily recognized by the ordinary ear, and O is himself musical.) It sounds like music. E: Like what instrument? O: (Listening hard.) It sounds like an organ (correct). O then starts to take out his fountain pen, though he had only a pencil in his pocket; and wakens. PosT-HYPNOTIC STAGE: E: What woke you? O: Your telling me to take a fountain pen out of my pocket. That didn’t seem right since I knew I didn’t have one; but the more you suggested it, the more I thought I did have one. E: What else do you recall? O: Problem. E: Can you remember it? O: I think I can. (He states it correctly.) E: Do you remember doing the problem? O: No. 30 CHARLES T. BURNETT E: Do you recall anything else about your sitting at the table? O: Feeling very sleepy, reciting Bowdoin Beata, nothing else. E: Do you remember any automatic writing? O: I think I can—not sure. I remember your asking me about it, but I don’t remember doing it. E: Do you remember anything else? O: I never felt before as I did when I sat at the table (in the Interim Stage). I felt numb, and finally awoke; but I could do the things you said I couldn’t. There is something else I’d like to say but can’t. Don’t know what it is, but I feel there is something there. E: Do you feel now the way you did when looking at the book? O: No. (Here tests for suggestibility were negative. O went on to say that he did not feel comfortable when sitting at the table; he wanted to go back to the easy chair.) E: Do you recall any difficulty of speech? O: 1 think that’s what I wanted to tell you about. As soon as I took a breath to say something, it seemed to stop. E: Did it bother you? O: Yes, because when I tried to talk my breath stopped. It was like trying to talk after you’ve run till you’re out of breath. E: Did you try to do anything? O: Yes, writing automatically. I didn’t like not being able to answer so many questions; and writing relieved my mind—to be able to say anything. E: Do you remember anything else? O: A band. (Record does not show whether this is correct. It is not improbable.) E: Do you recall an organ? O: No. Probative character of this experiment: O gathers information and performs a task according to a plan. Of all this he appears to be unaware; and a part of it at least (the writing) is being done while he seems to be fully occupied with another task that requires attention for its execution and receives enough to make its content remembered. O is able later to recall leading features of both tasks without resort to any source of information outside himself. Associative relations among the several stages and subgroups: Hyp. 1 is dissociated from the voice-group of Int., but not from Hyp. 2. No direct associations with Post-hyp. are apparent. In Int. the hand-group is dissociated from the voice-group, but reunited in Hyp. 2. The hand-group, however, is dissociated at least in part, perhaps wholly, from Post-hyp., but not so the voice-group. Hyp. 2, in turn, is in association with Post-hyp. Comments: (1) The scope of Hyp. 2 is narrower than with G. E. H. The touches on the anaesthetic hand of Int. are not recalled, though the writing is not forgotten. (2) The suggested dissociation of the speech function does not involve ideas of that SPLITTING THE MIND 31 function (as in the spontaneous case of G. E. H. See Exp. P). (3) There seems to be some resistance to the recall of the speech failure episode. (4) The recall, in Post-hyp., contrary to the rule, is largely spontaneous; that of Int. was due to, or furthered by, a suggestion in the preceding stage. (5) The abnormality of Int. is shown by sleepiness and yielding to suggestion. (6) Anaesthesia of the writing hand to touch is, as usual, spontaneous. EXPERIMENT /7. May 27, 1920, 2:30 p.m. OPRGs HH Bice Carlene eae Wee. Hypnotic Stace 1: Directions to O: When you awaken I shall have you sit at the automatic- writing table. I shall show you a number. If it is in ink of one color, you will record for me what happened during the dinner hour; if in two colors, you will record the events of the hour just preceding this present one. You will be unaware of this (7.e., what E has said) after you waken and while you are writing. (Directions repeated; then) Do you understand? (Affirmative response. ) INTERIM STAGE: O takes his seat at the table. E: Can you remember anything? O: No. E: What does it seem like? O: Like so much time lost. Seems a little as though I had been asleep—not much different. I do not feel as I do when I awaken in the morning. E: Do you feel awake? O: Not as alert as usual. His right hand is not anaesthetic. He is now shown a paper on which 29 appears in ink of one color. His concealed right hand immediately begins to write while he asks: “ What is it?” (See his statement in Hyp. 2 that he did not know what it meant.) E: What went on last hour? O: I was in the music room taking tests (correct). E: Did you find them difficult? O: Yes—the rhythm one in particular. E: What happened this noon? O: Everything—Junior marching. E: What can you tell me about it? O: We marched in Memorial Hall. There was not good attendance. E: What happened at the house? O: A meeting directly after dinner. E: Do these questions remind you of anything? O: No. The following writing has been produced meanwhile. At about 12:30 I went into the | dining room and sat down to the | table— ED Age Oe at my left|. . pO eee hes OE mE Ni SPSak Shs ae directly across the | table we had meat and|. . . potato and biscuits and | then all the Juniors went over|to Mem Hall after we ha (ran off paper) | a meeting around the | fireplace D.......... want (ran oft paper) | know about the Steward’ss account | going innto the Hop Com- 1 All proper names were written in full. 32 CHARLES T. BURNETT mittee|. . . And after the marching | we went over to the House | and’ then to the Psych-lab from|the house with L.......... We ica an ene (This writing is apparently in accord with the directions given O; the accuracy of details cannot be checked up.) Tests for anaesthesia of the right hand, at the close of the writing, are positive. Movements to be executed by the hand are not accomplished, though O thinks he has done them; but he has his left hand under full control. With the removal of the pencil from the right hand, feeling gradually returns, and full control. E: Do you feel awake now? O: More than I did. E: Do you connect with anything this beginning of more wakefulness? O: No; but I think your asking me so many questions woke me up. E: Do you recall anything from hypnosis? O: No. Tests of suggestibility are negative. Being shown the paper on which was the writing he had just produced, he does not recall having written it; nor does it call anything to mind. (The record does not state whether O was allowed to read the contents; but it is probable that he had a mere cursory glance. For further confirmation that O was unaware of writing, see the next experiment of the same afternoon—Exp. 8—and his reference, during the Interim Stage, to the present experiment.) Hypnotic STAGE 2: E: What were you doing at the table? O: Writing what happened this. noon (apparently correct). E: What did I ask you? O: What I did at noon (correct). E: (Apparently in the hope of getting details.) What were you writing? O: What I did this noon. E: Did two things seem to be going on together? O: Yes, I knew what I was writing for a few minutes. E: What do you mean? That while talking you knew about your writing? Oeuy és. E: When precisely were you aware of it? O: When you asked me what I was doing. I forgot it immediately after I finished answering. (If O’s words be taken verbatim, the record does not show that this question was either asked or answered. As O is probably correct in this remembrance, such an omission would be serious, since we are unable to compare his original answer with his present recollection. If, on the other hand, O’s words be given a loose reference, they may refer to the question, “ What happened this noon?” In that case O’s answer to the present question and a few immediately following mean that when E questioned him about events that were also the theme of his writing, he became briefly aware that he was indeed writing about them, but directly afterward lost that awareness. ) ; E: Do you refer to my first question? O: To that and one or two others. E: When I asked the question, you thought both of what you were writing and what you were saying? O: Yes, when you asked me the question about this noon. E: Did my questions seem to influence your writing? O: I don’t know. (This revelation that the hand-group was united for brief intervals with the voice-group—a combination effected, apparently, by the special conditions of this experiment—leaves still a tract of the Interim Stage about which to draw conclusions for the main purpose of this experiment.) E: When did you begin to feel less sleepy? O: After I finished writing. SPLITTING THE MIND 33 E: Do you remember that I asked you that question while you were zat the table? O: Yes. E: What answer did you make then? O: That I felt less sleepy when you asked me so many questions. E: Was that a correct answer? O: Not exactly—it seemed correct at ‘the time; for I didn’t know exactly. E: Did the number mean anything to you? O: No. E: What do you think of between questions? O: Nothing. (Post-hyp. is lacking because a new experiment was begun at once.) Probative character of this experiment: O selects a task to be .done according to a previously arranged code and executes it, while, in some sense, unaware of what he is to do and, at least for a part of the execution, unaware that he is doing it. Later he recalls what he has done, though meanwhile without informa- tion from any source outside himself; and recalls the fact of dissociation (see Exp. 8). Associative relations among the several stages and subgroups: With the aid of suggestion, Hyp. 1 is dissociated from the voice- group of Int., but not from the hand-group. There is no evidence as to its connection with Hyp. 2. In Int. the hand-group is part of the time dissociated from the voice-group and occasionally ‘reunited with it, on the stimulus of questions that concern common areas of fact. Both are united again in Hyp. 2. A suggestion in Hyp. 1 is a factor in the stage succeeding Hyp. 2, as shown in the second experiment of this date (Exp. 8). Comments: (1) While executing a suggestion unconsciously, O feels sleepy. This feeling passes off, says O in Hyp. 2, when the suggested function is ended; but in Int. he attributes the renewed alertness to E’s continued questioning. (2) An impor- tant new feature of this experiment is the attempt to discover the effect upon the associative relations of the two groups in Int. of questions directed to facts known in common to both groups. “That effect is to bring about temporary association, but is very fleeting. (3) The hand-group has a better access to the noon- ‘hour events than the voice-group, if fullness of report be the test. (4) The force of the inhibitions that keep the groups apart is indicated by the fact that when the voice-group has access to a ‘sight of the written paper, no pertinent memories arise. (5) Again we note the lack of thinking, in the hypnotized mind, when 34 CHARLES T. BURNETT left to itself. (6) The delusion of control over the right hand, when that system is dissociated, raises the question as to the felt signs of voluntary action. (7) The removal of the pencil from the writing hand seemed to be sufficient to remove the inhibiting impulse that conditioned the dissociation. In what group of psychic items was its locus? Does the hand-group “ fend off ”’ the voice-group? The latter seems in all these experiments to play a relatively passive role. ; EXPERIMENT 8. May 27, 1920, 3:30 p.m. Oi GoRnhy Rae, Sacer Ree Werke (This experiment immediately followed another on the same observer.) Hypnotic Stace 1: (Named so for convenience. It is identical with Hypnotic Stage 2 of Experiment 7.) Directions to O: When you waken I shall give- you a book to read. If the number of lines in the fable is more than 10 you will say Boston automatically; if less than 10 you will say New York auto- matically, without knowing you have said it. (Directions repeated; then) Do you understand? (Affirmative reply.) INTERIM STAGE: O recalls nothing that has just been going on. He resists suggestions directed to motor control, saying he would rather not lift his arm. He feels: sleepy. Being handed the book he reads the fable aloud; and, finishing, he immediately says “New York,” a correct fulfilment of the suggestion. E: What is the last word you said? O: Pieces (the last word of the fable). E: What have you just read? (O tells the story correctly.) E: Were you doing anything else while reading? O: No. (Later in this stage, he contradicts this statement by his written word.) E: Are you sleepy? O: No. E: Are you more waked up than a while ago? O: Yes. I woke up- gradually by reading, I guess. E: Do you remember now what you did at the table? O: Yes—talking with you and writing about what I did this noon. I did not know I was writing. (Experiment 7 is here referred to; and this. bit of evidence is referred to in the discussion of the probative value of the earlier experiment.) E: What did you say when you finished reading the fable? O: I said’ ““ pieces.” E: Why? O: You asked me what the last word I said was. E: Was that the last word? O: Yes. O is now directed to sit at the table and, with pencil in his screened right hand, is given the opportunity to write, but without verbal suggestion: to do so. The hand at once accepts the opportunity. E: What was the word you uttered after the fables? O: (Speaks.): Pieces; (writes) New York. SPLITTING THE MIND 35 E: What were you thinking about while reading? O: (Speaks.) Nothing except about reading the fable; (writes) Counting the lines. E: Did you feel that you were giving attention to the case (i.e., the read- ing)? O: (Speaks.) Yes. (Writes an illegible scrawl.) Tests of right-hand anaesthesia are now positive. During these tests the hand is writing the number series from 1 to 14, trailing after that into illegibility what may be intended for higher numbers in the series, and ending with a word-like scrawl. E gave no intentional suggestion for this writing. It may have been the expression of line counting or of the counting of touches impressed on his anaesthetic hand, or, indeed, have some other meaning. O is now plied with suggestions for sleep, which he does not accept. E: But you want to, don’t you? O: Yes. E: But you don’t intend to? O: Not unless you want me to. (It is an error of technique that E did not question O as to whether he knew that he was writing and what the contents were. The answers, coupled with the proper inquiries and answers of Hypnotic Stage 2, might have made this important evidence. ) Hypnotic Stace 2: (Again, named so for convenience; this is really the third hypnosis in sequence. ) E: What was the last word you said after reading the paragraph? O is silent, even when the question is repeated several times. He is then sent to the table and given a chance to write under the usual conditions, but without verbal suggestion to do so. The record has no entry as to the stimulus used to make O go to the table. It would seem that he must have been led; but one queries, of course, whether here, with apparent inconsistency, he responded to an auditory stimulus. The answers to the following questions, to the end of this stage, were all obtained in writing. E: Do you hear me? O: Yes. E: Why don’t you reply to me? O: J can’t. E: Why not? O: Because I can’t speak. E: Do you want to speak? O: I don’t know. I can’t hear what you say to do (This word—if this be the one intended—runs partly off the paper) | things. . E: What do you mean? O: / can’t hear what you say|to do anything I can’t hear you. By direction of E, R calls O by name. E: Do you hear Henry speak? O: Yes, but I don’t. E: Don’t what? O: Hear him. E: Do you feel my touch on your hand? (Unfortunately the record does not show which one was touched; of course, E believes it to have been the writing hand.) O: Yes, but I don’t. E: Don’t what? O: Feel it. E: How can you feel it and not feel it at the same time? O: I don’t think I feel it but I do. E: Will you try to remember about this when you are wakened? O: Yes. E: Do you think it will be hard to remember? O: Yes. I don’t think I can. E: Why? O: I don’t know. E: Let me see you lift your left hand. O: J can’t hear you. E: Do you feel comfortable? O: Yes. 36 CHARLES T. BURNETT E: Would you like to be waked up? O: Don’t care. E: Are you any more deeply asleep than usual in hypnosis? O: In a different way. E: How different? O: Don’t know. After being given a suggestion that he will be able to recall the experience, O is wakened. This takes place without difficulty, and, presumably by the usual auditory cue. (With regard to the main purpose of this experiment, it is an error in technique that, in Hypnotic Stage 2, O was not questioned about the line counting, to discover whether he could recall it and whether he felt that, at the time of counting, he was unaware of it.. E’s surprise at the turn - taken by the experiment is the explanation for this omission. This seems to be supplied fortunately by the written statement on this point, obtained in the Interim Stage. But for the failure to inquire about this writing itself, and thus, if possible, to constitute it further evidence, according to our canons, there is no substitute. However, such an excellent case of instant, adequate verbal adaptation to the real past will seem to many to vouch sufficiently for its psychic character, without further logical prop.) Post-HYPNOTIC STAGE: E: What do you remember of the past period? O: I don’t remember anything; it doesn’t seem like anything to me. E: Do you recall anything? O: No. E: Are you trying to? O: I don’t see how I can try to recall. An interruption occurred at this point (length unspecified in the record) after which E resumes hopefully. E: Now do you recall anything? O: No (but see below). E: Do you want to? O: (Slowly) I don’t know. E: What do you recall, then? O:I1 have a general feeling of great contusion. ; E: Do you recall anything before the last hypnosis? O: No (but his next answer shows recovery). E: Do you recall anything from the afternoon’s work? O: Yes—about the fable—something with pencils (which he sees lying on the table and which he says look familiar); but I don’t remember doing anything with them. E: What did I show you? O: 29. (Correct, see Exp. 7.) E: Anything else—any other paper? O: No—just 29 on it (incorrect). E: Any paper with automatic writing on it? O: No (incorrect). O’s right hand feels prickly as if asleep and his face numb. “ Feels confused, removed by suggestion in hypnosis,” runs the record. Probative character of this experiment: While reading a fable so attentively that he is able afterward to give the story correctly, O, having forgotten what he was told to do, is counting the number of lines in the fable, interpreting the result by a code already known to E, and expressing the meaning by two spoken words—of all of which he is unaware immediately afterwards. Later, he recalls the counting and the words as spoken, without access meanwhile to any source of information outside himself. SPLITTING THE MIND 37 In the foregoing, the only weakness, according to our accepted canons of proof, is the absence of a test for awareness, while the alleged co-conscious process was im operation. Associative relations among the several stages and subgroups: Hyp. 1 is not associated with the reading-group of Int., and there is no evidence that it is associated with the (hypothetical) prob- lem-group, though of course the latter has been causally deter- mined by it. There is, again, no evidence as to its association with Hyp. 2, but positive evidence that it is dissociated from Post- hyp. The problem-group is apparently dissociated from the reading-group, and there is no evidence as to its association with Hyp. 2 or later integration with the reading-group. It is entirely dissociated with Post-hyp., unless “‘ something with pencils’ be a vague reference to it. There is no evidence as to whether the reading-group is associated with Hyp. 2, but for its association with Post-hyp. the evidence is positive, although O forgets one fact, viz., being shown the paper containing his writing. Comments: (1) The auditory disconnection, apparently com- plete except for the waking-cue and, possibly, the stimulus that sent him to the table, is the new fact of interest. It is more inclusive than in the other experiment of May 27, 1920 (Exp. 7). Then O could not think how to speak; now he cannot hear. Unfortunately no attempt was made, in the present experiment, to discover whether O could vocally answer visually presented questions, or hear other sounds besides speech. So we do not know whether merely speech from auditory cues, or perhaps all sounds, too, were inhibited; or the vocal apparatus also. The latter, if inhibited, was not carrying on separate activity, whereas the hearing-of-speech function was evidently so doing.. This coupled with the writing has the appearance of being both psychic and co-conscious, and its scope of knowledge resembles that of the usual Hyp. 2, in which O communicates by speech. All the mind-expressing organs of the body except the writing-hand seem to have been in the service of an unusually limited psychic-group. Perhaps it was felt as a dreamy, negative state. The external appearance of O would indicate that as much as anything. But one glimpse into its content is in its accessibility to the auditory 38 CHARLES T. BURNETT cue of waking and, possibly, to an auditory one for going to the table. The writing-hand insists on the fact of co-consciousness— that he hears but he doesn’t, that he feels touches but he doesn’t— and in conjunction with evidence from other experiments this is of great importance. But, by themselves, the facts of this inter- esting Hypnotic State 2 do not conform sufficiently to our canons to be accepted as evidence. These flatly contradictory statements of O indicate that the stage in which he makes them is broad ~ enough to include two states, otherwise dissociated, whose pecu- liarities, as dissociated states, are, nevertheless, known all together in this stage. (2) In Int. O’s sleepiness seems to be curiously on the verge of suggestibility. He resists, yet wants to go to sleep, but he declares he won't, unless E wishes it. (3) The automatic writing occurred without verbal suggestion; but to place a susceptible person in position for writing is probably to give him a pretty definite visual-tactual-kinesthetic suggestion. (4) The dissociation of Hyp. 2 from Post-hyp. despite a definite suggestion that it be remembered, is noteworthy. This dissocia- tion is nearly complete—everything gone but a “ general feeling of great confusion.” When told that he was to remember, he expressed serious doubt of his ability to do so, without knowing why it should be so difficult, but adding that he was asleep in a different way than what was usual for him in hypnosis. He was unable to characterize this difference. That this dissociation was in some sense motivated is hinted by his statement that he does not know whether he wants to recall the forgotten experiences. The problem of motivation versus passive disconnection is here opened up for all hypnotic dissociation. (5) The bodily mem- bers connected with the dissociated experiences—right hand and face—show an altered sensory state; the hand is now anaesthetic, now prickly; the face is numb. (6) When O in Int. declared that he felt he had been giving attention to the reading, the hand is apparently moved to some sort of resistance or modification of statement; but in its turn is subject to some inhibition that reduces the writing to an illegible scrawl. SPLITTING THE MIND 39 EXPERIMENT 9. (Three experiments in one.) April 26, 1921, 2 p.m. OF GYEAH. Priel ae: Roce Ds The experiments here reported formed a part of a larger one designed to determine the means by which a hypnotized person could pick out, with almost infallible certainty, one sheet of blank paper from many other similarly blank sheets as the one on which he had previously seen a (suggested) portrait. It is included here because it seems, incidentally, to furnish evidence for coconsciousness. Hypnotic Stace 1: E speaks: I am going to show you a card. On that card you will find a picture of Abraham Lincoln. Have you ever seen a picture of him? (O says “yes.”) You will be able to open your eyes and still stay quite asleep. A blank oblong of light blue cardboard, about two and one-half inches by four inches, was put into O’s hands, his eyes being open. This card he had been unable to distinguish from other similar cards outside hypnosis. E: Can you see the face? O: Yes. E: Describe it. O: Side whiskers—looking straight at me. E: How much of him is represented? O: Just the head and shoulders. E: How do the eyes look? O: Looking straight at me—usual picture. O then closed his eyes, while the card was inserted as one of a pack of ten similar cards, about seventh from top and right side up, behind O’s back. The pack was handed to him, with directions to pick out the picture he had just seen. In one and two-thirds minutes, O said that he did not see it. Being asked whether he was deeply asleep, he nodded his head; and tests showed him to be fully suggestible. He was then handed the same card as before, and was told that it was a picture of Washington. E: Describe it. O: He has on a powdered wig; is looking a little to the right—a full-length portrait. He has on a Revolutionary coat and sword, buff colored trousers which are quite tight, shoes and buckles. E: Have you seen a picture like that before? O: Yes. E: Where? O: In an engraving. The card was then placed right side up in the former pack, about seventh from the top, and O was asked to pick out Washington’s picture. He ex- amined them in order for one and two-thirds minutes; and on reaching the correct card he said ‘I think this is it,” and looked no further. The other cards, said he, were also pictures, and he called one Madame de Pompadour. E: How did you recognize the pictures of Washington? O: I can always recognize his picture. It is full length. I didn’t see any other of him. E: How did you recognize the picture of Madame de Pompadour? O: I have just been studying it, (and he went on to give a full description— dress, books, globe, music, etc.). These answers are pretty nearly what one would expect from a person who had really been looking at a portrait. INTERIM STAGE: E: Are you awake? O: Yes. 40 CHARLES T. BURNETT E: What has happened? O: I can’t remember. The last thing I can recall is a feeling as though waves were rushing down over my head. They go farther and farther away—and then I woke up. Sitting at the table (whether at E’s request or spontaneously, does not appear in the record), with a pencil placed by E in his screened right hand, he began at once to write spontaneously. At the same time he discussed with E this experience of hypnotic induction, laughing and talking easily. He repeated the multiplication tables of twelves and elevens, going in the latter to 18x 11. E: Can you still repeat those verses by Amy Lowell with which you amused me last year (referring to “Gargoyles”)? O: (laughing) I can’t remember them. E: Are you awake? O: (laughing) Yes, of course. E: What are you doing? O: Talking with you. E: What are you doing with your right hand? O: Nothing. I have a pencil in it. E: What have you been doing with it? O: Moving it around; but I haven’t been thinking about it. E: Tell me when you feel a touch (proceeding with the test which showed that the writing hand was anaesthetic to the wrist). O: My hand feels asleep. (later) My hand is so asleep I can hardly tell. (He hesitated in making answers; and said usually: “I think you touched me.’’) A test further showed that the writing hand was suggestible, though O felt that he was in full control in all parts. When the screened hand was brought once more into view, O felt all touches upon it while looking at it. Meanwhile O’s screened hand had been writing spontaneously. E moved the paper occasionally, and sometimes moved the hand into position, lifting it by the sleeve. Once in a while E, during his talk with O, looked at the writing and at the hand producing it. This method was followed throughout this experiment. The writing was as follows: Washington . . . Mme de Pompadour portraits|. . . Revolutionary coat. . .|. . .| brass buckles .. . on shoes}. . .| heavy whtte & gold | es . . . globe to represent her interes (E moved the paper here to start O on a new line) | interests in books music I can always | pick portraits . . . oranges|. . .|. . .| gold white 3 a BER SCs 10) fr ae peas SORE ee vce: 1, OCESe. earn : | Gargoyles A Comedy ys Exag | (After writing. this title of a poem O began a new line spontaneously.) Thimble RO The contents of this writing refer to the experiences of Hyp. 1, with the exception of the part beginning with “ Gargoyles.” Here the poem is not cor- rectly named, “ Exag,” obviously abbreviated from Exaggeration, being sub- stituted for “ Oppositions.” The first line is correctly started. Its occurrence here is apparently due to the question about it, put to O during this same Interim Stage and which he laughingly declared he could not remember. It is of course possible that the little he wrote was known to him in his dominant state, in spite of his declaration of ignorance; he was not tested upon this. The source of “oranges” is in certain suggestions made to test the depth of Hyp. 1. Hypnotic STAGE 2: O was told to take his seat at the table on awaking, and write automatically, without being aware of it, the real basis of distinction by which he recog- nized the picture of Washington. SPLITTING THE MIND 41 INTERIM STAGE 2: In answer to a question O stated that he recalled nothing of Hyp. 2. Rising and moving toward the table he was asked why he did so. Because he thought he would, was the reply. At E’s request, he recited some of Amy Lowell’s poetry. He also gave an account of what he had been doing all day. Reciting with difficulty some college songs, he took part in a bantering, laughing conversation. He was asked, with reference to each hand and foot, in successive questions, whether E had moved it. He replied in each case: “I don’t think you have.” He was also asked, severally, what he was doing with each hand and foot, and to each question he replied “ nothing.” He was not suggestible except in his concealed right hand, which was also anaesthetic as far as the wrist. He declared that he felt all right in every part; and yet, when E placed two hands on O’s two hands, O said his right hand felt asleep, and that he could not feel E’s hand on it. Being asked as to whether he felt that he had good control of both hands, he replied that he was not sure, because his right hand was so fast asleep. Referring to Int. 1, he commented that he was not quite as usual; he was day-dreaming. E: Are you now? O: No, but I have been while sitting here this time. E: Why do you say so? O: I felt differently. I didn’t think of it at the time; so the difference must appear only in retrospect. -E: Can you recall any of the day-dream? O: No. The screen was removed. When O’s eyes were closed, his right hand was still suggestible; when his eyes were open, he refused to obey, but with difficulty. At this time he wrote the following introspection: “My eyes were closed and I was told to raise my left hand, which I did. Then I was told to raise my right hand (but told also that he could not succeed) which I also did, both hands being raised with customary ease. I was then asked if my hands were up, and I answered that of course they were. I was told to open my eyes; and much to my surprise, my right hand was not raised from the table. I thought at first that I could not believe my eyes, because my right hand felt raised just as much as my left hand, which actually was raised. Of course I finally had to believe my eyes; but the situation was very startling and confusing. It came down to which sense I would believe really, because feeling told me it was up, and sight that it was down.” Then E took up the questioning again: E: What has been happening of importance? O: Talking with you. E: You have been writing. What have you written? O: I didn’t know that I was writing; so I don’t know what I wrote. Meanwhile his hand had been producing the following: By seeing the marks | although I didn’t know|it . . .| only by marks marks marks | marks marks marks | marks marks marks | marks marks on the paper paper | marks on the paper This was the content of a single sheet. Much more was written to the same effect and with the same iteration but without further new ideas. All of it constitutes the response to the suggestion given in Hyp. 2. That the statements are true, that this is the actual basis for this well-known capacity in hypnosis, has been shown in certain unpublished experiments by E, of which the one now being reported constitutes a part. Hypnotic Stace 3: E: Now I want you to tell me what vou were doing at the table. O: Talk- ing with you and writing. 42 CHARLES T. BURNETT E: What? O: How I told (recognized) the photograph. E: How did you? O: By marks on the paper. E: How can you remember now if you were not aware then? OQ: I don’t know. E: Did you know at the time, that you were picking out the picture by these marks? O: No. E: How do you know now? O: Because that is what I wrote. I thought I was picking it out by the picture. I saw others beside the one desired. E: Do you remember directly, now, how you did it? O: I don’t think so—except by the portrait. I think I see the marks and then see the portrait right off. E: Is this recalled from the original experience? O: No, I only saw the portrait then. E: Why do you think so now? O: Because that is what I wrote. E: Might you not have written what wasn’t so? O: No. E: Why are you so sure? O: You told me to write the reason; so I wrote it. E: Were these marks easy to find? O: I don’t remember. E: Do you recall looking for any other beside Washington? O: Yes— Abraham Lincoln. E: Did you find it? O: No. E: Why not? O: Because he wasn’t there. E: How could you tell? O: Because so many were upside down, I couldn’t tell. E: What were upside down? O: The pictures. E: What made you think them upside down? O: Because they looked that way. (This, of course, may have happened, but not intentionally, during the progress of the experiment. In the larger whole of which the present experiment formed a part, one, at least—the critical card—really was turned upside down, and possibly others.) E: Were you trying to recognize Lincoln as you did Washington? O. Yes, by the picture. E: You said you recognized Washington by the marks on the paper. O: I don’t remember doing that. E: When you waken you will write for me automatically the real reason why you failed to recognize Lincoln. INTERIM STAGE 3: O went to the table without further direction and his hand began to write behind the screen. He said that he recalled nothing which had been going on; that he had felt asleep. At E’s request, he named the states of the Union, forward and backward, using, he said, visual images to recall them; and he also named the Presidents but not in their order. Tests showed anaes- thesia of the writing hand as far as the wrist. E: What are you doing with your hand? O: Holding a pencil in it. E: Are you awake or asleep? O: Awake. E: Are you day-dreaming? O: While being touched. (The right hand was not the only part touched in the tests for anaesthesia.) f E: At any other time? O: Yes, pretty nearly all the time. E: Is this different from your ordinary experience? O: Yes. E: What do you mean by “day-dreaming”? O: Not being so aware of things around me, not so alert. SPLITTING THE MIND 43 E: Lift your left hand. O does so. E: (pressing his hand down over O’s right) Lift your right hand. (E felt a little lifting movement under his hand but not much.) E: Have you done so? O: Yes—one hand was raised as high as the other. E: Is one hand as free as the other? O: Yes, so far as I can tell. The writing was this: I didn't notice the|marks on the . .:\. paper|.....|2 marks on the paper marks|nkansasn . . . marks|no marks paper|. . . (This line to this point written from right to left) marks . . .|. . . marks on the|paper . . . paper... no marks on the paper | like Lincoln’s picture|. . . (with right-to- left return of the foregoing toward the end) . . . marks | on the paper paper | The truth of this statement, given in response to the demand for infor- mation on this point made in Hyp. 3, cannot, of course, be objectively veri- fied, but is in accord with the basis of judgment in such matters, as already stated in this experiment, on the ground of experimental evidence. The meaningless intrusion of a single state name out of the voice-group is puzzling. Hypnotic Stace 4: -E: What were you writing? O: The reason why I couldn’t find Lincoln’s picture (correct). E: What was it? O: I didn’t see the marks (that were) on Lincoln’s picture (correct). E: What sort of marks? O: Flaws on Lincoln’s picture that I could see. I wrote that I found the photograph by flaws. I remember the flaws. (But he does not remember using them as a clue to the portrait. See below.) E: Was what you wrote correct? .O: It must have been. E: Why do you say “must have been”? O: Because I don’t remember that it was. E: Do you mean that you had access to information when writing that you haven’t now? O: I did before I wrote. E: How much before? O: Just as soon as you told me to write it. E: While you were hypnotized? O: Yes. E: Did you at that moment actually recall? O: Yes. E: Can you now recall? O: Perhaps. E: Try. (then, after a pause) Have you succeeded? O: I can’t think of it very well. E: Now you can. O: Yes, I remember it now. E: Remember what? O: How I found the portrait. E: How did you find it? O: By the marks on the paper. E: Were you aware at the time of how you were finding it? O: No. E: Is it easier to talk of your experiences or to write of them? O: I don’t like to think of them. E: Why? O: Too hard. E: Would you rather I didn’t suggest that you remember them when you wake up? O: I don’t care. E: You will be able to recall these experiences easily, without effort. You will remember if you wish to. Post-HYPNoTIC STAGE: O felt more awake than ever. He recalled hallucinations from Hyp. 1; he remembered about writing (not the act—see below) but not what he had 44 CHARLES T. BURNETT written; he remembered telling about the content of the writing but could not recall where or how he got the information. He remembered telling, not writing, it. He recalled also being told to do various things—raise his hands, etc. E: Did you feel much different at the table from the way you felt in the easy chair? O: No—not much of a breaking point between them. E: What was the situation in the easy chair? O: I was hypnotized. At the table I felt more like myself but not quite. There was a feeling of op- pression; I wanted to throw off something and be awake. E: Do you feel that way now? O: No, I don’t. In the Interim Stage at the table, when asked how I felt, I would say I felt awake the same as ever, and it seemed so; but just before and just after the question every- thing seemed hazy and not free. E: What did you feel about the suggestions for hand movements? O: It seemed to me that I was executing the right-hand movements; but as I felt no good report from that hand I wasn’t sure. E: You don’t usually remember these things when you come out of hypnosis. O: You told me to. E: Do you care to? O: I prefer to. E: How do you feel preference? O: In the Post-hypnotic stage the attempt to recall is disagreeable. (The term “ post-hypnotic” presumably means here any one of the interim stages also.) _E: What was the difference, in and out of hypnosis, in the reasons for wanting to remember? O: In hypnosis, because you want me to remem- ber; out of hypnosis, because I’m curious to know what took place. It is disagreeable even now to try to recall how I pick out the picture. (This was done in hypnosis, which, however, O declares below to be agreeable.) I remember about them but not the things themselves. I can remember tell- ing you (i.e., in hypnosis) how I did it but I don’t want to remember the “how” itself; I am not remembering it now. I have often noticed this. E: Do you think you could remember the “how”? O: Yes, I think I could. E: Why is it so disagreeable? O: Because the original state (meaning as shown below, an interim stage) was so confused. While in that state I was not bothered by it. It seems muddled and unreal—not the way I usually think. It is much more agreeable to be hypnotized than to be in one of those interim states. In hypnosis you take things as they come; in the in- terim state you have to sort of keep awake. It is perplexing to think of things then which you are able easily to think of when hypnotized. (Yet, in Hyp. 4 he declared it was “too hard” to think of how he had picked out portraits in hypnosis.) There is apparently some contradiction in O’s comparisons between hyp- notic and interim stages. These would all be resolved if. we suppose that the open-eye hypnosis of Hyp. 1, in which O picked out portraits, was more like interim states than like his usual hypnotic experiences. His introspec- tion seems to indicate that they felt more alike; and they have in common the important character of dissociation (or at least physical disconnection) of processes. Probative character of this experiment: There are three parts to the evidence, corresponding to as many instances of writing, and taken here in their original order. 7 SPLITTING THE MIND 45 1. O spontaneously writes about matters of which he has previously been talking but has, in some sense, now forgotten. In this writing he also generalizes a little on the earlier situation (“I can always pick portraits’) and starts to write—and cor- rectly—other matters which he declares he has forgotten—all this, while in some sense unaware of his writing and while carry- ing on an animated conversation and repeating multiplication tables. No sufficient attempt was made to find out whether he could later recall what he had been writing. 2. In two instances, while occupied with other matters requir- ing attention, and not able to recall certain directions given to him, he carries these out, though in some sense unaware of his act; and in so doing contradicts his own earlier statement. Later he recalls this act and the content of his writing, without access, meanwhile, to any source of information outside himself. Associative relations among the several stages and subgroups: The following summary gives the facts: Hyp. 1, with Int. 1, hand-group only (Hyp. 2 not tested) ; with Int. 2, hand-group only; with Hyp. 3, according to O’s assertion in Hyp. 4; with Int. 3, hand-group only; with Hyp. 4 and Post-hyp., each, at least in part. _ Int. 1, hand-group; not with Post-hyp. (other stages not tested). Voice-group, with Int. 2, in part at least (other stages not tested). Hyp. 2, with Int. 2, hand-group only; with Hyp. 3 (later stages not tested). Int. 2, both groups with Hyp. 3 (Int. 3 and Hyp. 4 not tested) ; voice-group possibly, but not the hand-group, with Post-hyp. The contribution of this voice-group cannot be distinguished from the corresponding contributions of the next interim stage. Nor indeed can we tell whether each does contribute. Hyp. 3, with Int. 3, hand-group only (Hyp. 4 not tested) ; with Post-hyp., possibly, but it is impossible to distinguish between the contributions here of Hyp. 3 and Hyp. 4, nor can we be sure whether each does contribute. into: hand-group, with Hyp. 4; not with Post-hyp. Int. 3, 46 CHARLES T. BURNETT voice-group (Hyp. 4 not tested) ; with Post-hyp., possibly. See above. Hyp. 4, with Post-hyp., possibly. See above. In all the foregoing there was no aid to recall furnished inten- tionally by suggestion from E except in Hyp. 4 in two instances, one to take effect in that same stage, the other in Post-hyp. From the foregoing facts one may conclude that, so far as tested, the several hypnotic stages were all synthesized in -Post- hyp., and the voice-group of the Interim Stages was also; but that the hand-group of all the interim stages remained dissociated from the final synthesis. Comments: (1) How much is the voice-group aware of the writing hand? The record of the three interim stages shows (a) that O was aware of holding the pencil (Int. 1 and 3; no test of Int. 2), (b) of moving it around but not thinking about it (Int. 1), (c) of doing nothing with it (Int. 2), (d) that this hand felt asleep (Int. 1 and 2), (e) that he had illusions of control over it (Int. 1, 2, 3). At no time was the voice-group aware of the meaning of the hand movement. (2) This experiment shows . that for dissociation in interim stages no special suggestion that O will not know what his writing hand is doing is necessary. This suggestion was not given for the first interim stage and was given for the other two, yet in all three O was unaware that he was writing. (3) In all the interim stages there was motor dissociation (disconnection) of the writing hand from the voice- group. This function was restored to the voice-group again by aid of vision, but with difficulty (Int. 2). (4) Anaesthesia again characterizes the writing hand, and touch is restored when the hand can be seen (Int. 1). That is to say, touch is integrated with the voice-group once more by aid of thé visual function. (5) Felt characteristics of the interim stages—dreaminess, hazi- ness, lack of freedom, oppression, sense of something to be thrown off—disappear at once before the question, “ Are you awake?” but return immediately after answer has been given. (6) Q’s statement in Hyp. 3 implied that Hyp. 1 was a double state, 7.e., one of co-consciousness; but being further questioned, it appeared that he did not recall directly a second group of experiences but SPLITTING THE MIND 47 only his writing about that group, just as, later, he was able to recall not the writing but only telling about it. EXPERIMENT 10. May 3, 1921, 3:15 p.m. Ore adank. BceGech Bs, Rs Geko: (See introductory note to Experiment 9.) Hypnoric Srace 1: O is told that he will be shown a card on which will appear a portrait of Washington (the card, of course, being blank). He remarks that he knows Roosevelt’s portrait better. So E hands him a (suggested) picture of Roosevelt instead. O describes the portrait. This card is then put aside down into a small pack of similar blank cards, and O fails to find the portrait again. E gives him the same card again, in the original position, ask- ing whose portrait it is. The record of the reply is as follows: “O answers George Washington. This is Roosevelt, says O—about like the other, but in this one hasn’t glasses on—did in the other—suggests, himself, pictures on the cards—McKinley, Wilson, Harding. Correct judgment given in 40 Sec. -Card D (one used in the earlier Roosevelt experiment. C. T. B.) was used again, not reversed.” From the tenor of this statement and of the following dialogue, it seems warrantable to doubt that R has inserted Washington in the correct place in the record. O’s recognition of other portraits was due to E’s suggestion that he do so;—O remarking that it seemed to be a series of the Presidents; and occasionally passing over one as not identifiable. E: How did you recognize Roosevelt? O: By his features, especially his smile. E: What were you thinking of between times? O: Presidents, I guess. E: Are you sure you recognized the pictures by characteristics of features? ‘O: Yes, the same as any picture. E: When you waken, go to the table and write for me the real basis by which you distinguished the picture of Roosevelt. You will be unaware that you are writing and will be able to converse meanwhile. INTERIM STAGE: E: What do you remember? O: Good nap (going to the table and sitting down), just like being asleep. (It is an error, perhaps, that O was not ques- tioned further on this point, to make sure he could not recall.) He describes the feeling of on-coming hypnosis; his inability to recognize its arrival. Meanwhile his right hand is writing. He describes further, ‘how he goes to sleep; then—spontaneously-—-what he did the night before.— the dreams he had, etc. He converses rapidly, easily, entertainingly. Once. early in the writing, in a pause of the conversation, he had a far-away look. E: What have you been doing? O: Talking about dreams, describing how I go under hypnosis, etc. E: Was anything else happening? O: No, only your touching me. (This. ‘presumably, refers to check tests on other parts of the body. Tests for anaesthesia of right hand had been positive as far as the wrist.) E: Are you awake or asleep? O: Awake. Ee Surer (OO? Yes: O has no control over the writing hand, but over his other limbs he has. 48 CHARLES T. BURNETT For example: E: (in a loud and confident tone) Now, you are going to lift your right hand (which is, of course, behind the screen). (O obeys.) E: Now you can’t put it down. O: Yes I can (but he does not). E: Are you awake? O: Yes, sure! O says that his hands are cold, that he can’t feel with his right hand,. though he can with his left. When E takes the screen away, O regains con- trol. Now follows a test of suggestibility, the right hand being visible to O. E: You have to scratch your ear with your right hand. O: (scratches it | with his left hand. He says that he must look at his right, to make sure it doesn’t scratch the ear; he doesn’t dare look away. But he succeeds in refraining. ) E: Is your hand all right now? O: (Finds it numb.) E: What was on the table? O: Paper and writing. (This had been carelessly left in view when the screen was moved, apparently without actual harm to the experiment, as shown by O’s next reply, but regrettably bung- ling.) E: What was the writing? O: I don’t know. I thought you wouldn't want me to read it. I had no inclination to do so; didn’t care what it did say. O is then told to put his right hand again behind the screen; he does so- and shuts his eyes. E: You can’t lift your right hand. O: (Hand does not rise.) E: Did you do this (1.e., lift your hand)? O: Yes. The screen being removed, O reports that his right hand is numb again. During the foregoing events of Int. the following writing was produced. It was interrupted, partly by tests for anaesthesia, partly because E did not. allow further opportunity for trial. . . I chose the picture | of Roosevelt | by the marks marks | marks: marks marks | marks |by the mark by the marks| Roosevelt, McKinley Roosevelt by the marks marks | by the marks | marks by marks | Washing- ton | McKinley Roosevelt grant | . . . | McKinley no picture | Roosevelt Roosevelt | Roosevelt McKinlyey | Roosevelt .. . | Hypnotic STAGE 2: E: What were you doing at the table? O: Talking to you about dreams.. You were touching my right hand. E: Did you know it? O: Not then. E: How now? O: Don’t know. Perhaps I knew it then but didn’t think about it. E: Were you aware then when I touched your right hand? O: Yes, I knew it. : But you didn’t say so. O: (hesitates) Don’t know. : What does that mean? O: I’ve forgotten the question. : (Repeats the question.) O: I didn’t know it then but do now. : When did you get the information? O: I remember it now. : Remember it now and not know it then? O: Yes. : Does this seem contradictory to you? O: You told me I wouldn’t know I was writing. E: Does this seem contradictory to you now? O: No. E: You could raise your left hand, though. O: You didn’t tell me any-- thing about my left hand. eoResRcoReNcofes) SPLITTING THE MIND 49 E: Did your right hand obey you or me when suggestions were given? O: When I wasn’t looking at it, it obeyed you. E: Was it obeying you the rest of the time? O: Yes. E: How could you tell? O: Felt as though it was. E: How could you feel it was obeying you and yet know it wasn’t? O: (hesitating, a look of troubled effort on his face; then after a long pause) I forgot the question. E: Did you notice what I whispered to R? O: No. E: How could you feel that your hand was obeying you and yet know that it wasn’t? O: I didn’t know that it wasn’t. E: How do you know now? O: Part of me must have known, because I can remember now, though I didn’t know then; that is, I didn’t think about it when talking to you. : E: Were you the part that was talking to me or the part that was writ- ing? QO: The part that was writing. E: Who was talking to me? O: That was—(hesitates) I don’t like to talk about that. E: Why not? O: I don’t like to think it was anybody else. E: Did -you feel quite natural while talking at the table? O: I don’t know whether I was talking to you or not. _E: You don’t remember how you felt? O: J felt all right. E: Who was talking to me if not you? O: (Silent. The record adds “uncomfortable, O says, doesn’t like to think about it.’’) E: Do you want to remember about this when you waken? O: I don’t care—yes. E: Was it true when you said, on waking formerly, that you didn’t re- member what happened? O: Yes—IJ knew about it, though. E: And that wasn’t you? O: (after an effort) Yes, that was me. . The suggestion is then given to O that he will remember on waking. PosT-HYPNOTIC STAGE: E: What does your present state seem like? O: Waking up from a nap. Not so clear as I usually am on waking up,—a dazed feeling, like when you wake up suddenly. ‘E: Do you recall what has been happening? O: Pictures of Roosevelt and Washington—Roosevelt’s twice (correct). E: What happened more recently? O: You told me to write at the table. I don’t know what went on then—something about dreams. I don’t re- member these things so well. Then you asked me if I had been writing at the table (really, what he had been doing). I can’t remember other things except confusedly. 1! remember telling you about writing but not the writ- ing itself. I remember your asking me questions about it but not just what they were. (Correct answers with the exception noted above.) E: Do you now recall it? O: You asked me how I could write (really, feel the hand was obeying and yet know it was not) and not know it; but I have forgotten what I told you. E: Can you tell me now? O: No, not by introspection. It seems as though first part of hypnosis was smooth and clear; then it became very confused. I don’t feel as if I wanted to remember. E: There is no other quality of this last hypnotic period that you can recall? ©O: I feel as if it was not very pleasant. I don’t like snarled up things. E: Would you like to recall all? O: I don’t want to make the effort. 50 CHARLES T. BURNETT E: If you could without effort, would you like to? O: Don’t know, sometimes I think I would, then that I wouldn’t. E: Did the last hypnotic state feel deep? O. Yes. After such I usually recall that something has happened, but not precisely what. As the foregoing experiment failed to show later knowledge of the orig- inal contents of the writing and as our canons of proof required this to be shown, a supplementary inquiry was undertaken on the same observer two days later (May 5, 1921, 2.00 p.m.) The original comment on the record, made close to the time the record itself was produced, states that he had, meanwhile, no access to outside sources of information; but it neglects to ~ state how E was assured of this. In Hyp. 1, O was approached as follows: E: I want you to recall for me what you wrote at the table a few days ago. QO: Didn’t know I was writing. E: What did you write about—what was the content of the writing? O: What you had told me to. E: What was that? O: How I picked out the picture. E: How did you? O: By—(hesitates) the marks on the paper. E: Do you remember what words you used? O: By the marks I picked out the picture of Roosevelt. (The original statement ran: I chose the pic- ture of Roosevelt by the marks.) E: Did you use these phrases? O: I think so—hard to remember. E: Do you remember anything else you wrote, if anything? O: Some- thing about Washington. I wrote by the marks two or three times because I wanted you to understand. (The objective facts here stated are correct but understated. ) E: Try again to remember anything else you wrote. O: I wrote Lincoln (this may perhaps be the final illegible word); and by the marks three or four times. E: Have you heard anything I have said to George? O: I heard it but paid no attention to it; I didn’t think you were talking to me. E: Can you tell what was said? O: Once you said: “Did you get that?” and then: “Is this going too fast for you?” I don’t think I heard anything else. (He speaks very slowly, knitting his brows and compressing his mouth—characteristic of him in hypnosis in this experiment and that of May 3, 1921.) E: Can you tell what George has said in reply to me? O: Once he said: “ What was that after that last question?” and once he said “ yes”; and once he said “ Yes, I’ve got that.” I don’t think he said anything else—yes, he said “What?” once or twice. E: What are you thinking of now? O: Not thinking. E: Having any experience at all? O: No—answering questions; and I can hear you asking questions and some one else speaking (voices from below). E: Any spontaneous thoughts of your own? O: No. Probative character of this experiment: O writes comments, pertinent and according to a plan, concerning his own earlier actions. He is in some sense unaware of so doing and, at the same time, engaged in animated conversation. Later, without access to outside sources of information, he is able to report with little error leading features of the content of that writing. SPLITTING THE MIND 51 Associative relations among the several stages and subgroups: Those of Hyp. 1 to later stages were not, so far as the record shows, fully investigated. A general statement of O, which, on its face, includes the present case, seems to justify the statement that vague associative relations persisted with the voice-group in Int. With the hand-group, the connection was close, also with Hyp. 2, though the breadth of connection here was not investi- gated; and, by suggestion, close connection persisted with Post- hyp. Int. showed mutual dissociation between the partial groups, these in turn being partly reunited in Hyp. 2. By suggestion the voice-group persists in Post-hyp., but the hand-group disappears unless it be as an awareness of a mere somewhat. Special items of Hyp. 2 are associated with Post-hyp. Comments: (1) In some way O felt that he was controlling the movements of his right hand; yet he knew later, without information from anyone else, that he was not. In some way, too, he could feel no touches on his writing hand, but afterward knew that he had been touched there. (2) Ordinarily such a question as, ““ What have you been doing?” is sufficient to call one’s attention at least to the unusual features of one’s conduct. Not so in this case in Int. (3) It is interesting to see the “struggle” of the visual function to retain in its group the right-hand-tactual function. When the right hand passed from view its tactual functions became at once dissociated. In the struggle the left hand seemed to assist by taking the suggestion given to the other. Even when the right hand was made visible its tactual-kinesthetic function was altered; it felt numb. Is this an associated sensation, appearing because usually accompanying this type of situation? The hand also felt cold to O. There is no indication in the record that this was tested. It was, however, not improbably an objective fact, for E noted that at least one other observer’s writing hand seemed quite cold to E’s touch. So it may be that the felt numbness had a peripheral basis. (4) The writing contradicts the statement made in Hyp. 1. In the latter O asserted that he recognized the pictures by characteristics of features “the same as any picture’’; in writing, “by the marks,” “no picture.” (5) Hesitation, troubled effort, silence 52 CHARLES T. BURNETT were characteristic behavior of O when he tried to face the apparent contradictions in his introspection. (6) One may remark on O’s apparent indifference, in hypnosis and the Interim Stage, to what he does not think is meant for him. EXPERIMENT 11. May 18, 1921, 2:45 p.m. ° a TWN Pe BA 2 Bis Gnt. Ba Rs.G; Kore Hypnotic Stace 1: The following directions were given to O: When you waken you will sit down at the writing table. I will show you a number on a piece of paper. If it be in ink of one color you will make automatically for each digit a corresponding number of circles, in a row, row under row; if in ink of two colors, use crosses for red ink digits and circles for those in black. Other- wise proceed as in the other case. (These directions were repeated; and then) Do you understand? (Affirmative reply.) INTERIM STAGE: : O goes to the table and sits down, putting his hand behind the screen spon- taneously, as both he and G. E. H. do regularly in such cases. E: What do you remember? O: Nothing. E: Is it a blank? O: Not quite. I feel as if something is there. E: What is the difference? O: As if something is there. I don’t know what. E: Is it like a forgotten name? O: I have no desire to think of this. I am annoyed to forget a name; but not this. , E: Can you say the multiplication table of 9’s? (O does so.) E: (showing O a card bearing the number 724, the 2 in red, the others in black) What’s that number? O: 724. E: What is its meaning to you? O: Nothing; just 724. E: Does it remind you of anything? O: No. I think I had a key like that once (with doubtful smile). bos Lscthiatiall tO sy ee: E: Can you describe the present situation? O: I am sitting in a chair, talking to you. You showed me a number, meaning nothing, in two kinds of ink. I’ve been trying to describe what I was thinking about. E: What else went on? O: George (R) writing at the table—nothing else. E: (who has been making some movements behind the screen) What do my actions make you think of? O: Asking questions, showing me num- bers, looking behind screen. E: What does looking behind the screen make you think of? O: That I might be writing. E: What is your right (writing) hand doing? O: Nothing. E: Can you catch it in anything? O: No. E: Your left hand? O: Yes, if I were doing anything with it. E: What do you hear? O: (who is actually making perceptible scratch- ing noises with the pencil, while writing) Train moving, batted ball, George writing, his chair creaking, minor noises. I could identify them if I tried to—rustle of clothing, etc. E: What are you doing with your right hand? O: Nothing. SPLITTING THE MIND 53 E: Do you surmise that you are doing something? O: Yes, that I am writing, because I have done it before. E: Do you feel it doing anything? O: No. During the foregoing conversation O was writing as follows in an irregu- lar, cramped hand: I am to make the I (written before the number was shown. Then fol- lows, in strict accord with the original suggestion, in three rows under each other, seven circles, two crosses, and four circles. Then the writing con- tinues.) Circles for black numbers |and crosses for red ones|in parallel rows. If in one .. . | (new sheet) Jf one colors I am to | show and if two colors I am to make . . . |circles crosses circles & crosses | There are two colors ci| circles & crosses different color of ink | crosses crosses One should observe that the statements made in the foregoing writing are correct; also that an interesting substitution of the appropriate word “ par- allel” has been made for the phrasing used in the original directions. Tests now made for anaesthesia are positive on the writing hand even half-way up that forearm and beyond. O’s manner of acknowledging the stimulus in that region in comparison with other parts of the body, is slow, hesitant, indicating that he barely feels it, as the following exchange shows: E: Why the difference in tone when saying yes (word used to acknowl- edge a felt stimulus)? O: Sometimes you touch so lightly I hardly know whether you are touching or not. (Needless to say, this was not an ob- jective difference.) E now proceeds to determine whether stimuli on the anaesthetic area can be shown to produce in O conscious effects of whose origin he is unaware. E: Please settle back quietly and tell me what number comes into your mind. Think of counting up the units that make up some number, for ex- ample, 1-2-3-4-5-6 for six, 1-2-3-4 for four, etc. Then tell me what num- ber comes into your head. Touching with the blunt end of a pencil the anaesthetic hand, in each case, the intended number of times, E used the following series: 2, 3, 5, 4, TAG LD 1.8, O: First number I-thought of was 13. E: When? O: A few minutes ago. (In this case enough time had elapsed before the stimulus was given to permit a choice in advance. The stimuli were given more promptly thereafter, at the rate of about three in two seconds. ) E: Think again. O: 9. E: Again. O: 7. E: Once more. O: 4. From this point O’s-replies agreed with the stimulus. Once during the series, a query or perhaps a mere glance from E that meant curiosity as to the source of these numbers, made O say, “Any object to take numbers from, —as when George tapped his pen against his head.” At the conclusion of the series a test for anaesthesia of the right hand was positive. Then occurred the following conversation: E: Where did you get the numbers? O: All sorts of places—some just thought of. E: How did they appear in your mind? O: Association. Was trying to think of numbers—lucky 2, unlucky 13. Don’t know how the rest came— sometimes from George’s motions—not consciously though. 54 CHARLES T. BURNETT E: Did you have any sensory imagery with the numbers? O: Don’t re- member. Don’t think so. May have been, but I don’t remember now. E: Do you recall anything else of significance to report? O: No. (E insists.) O: I can remember something but— E: What was that? O: I imagined the numbers as little white dots rep- resenting units of numbers. I’m not sure I had this at the time though. E: Shake hands with me. (O would of course naturally use his right, i.e., anaesthetic, hand.) Have you? O: Yes (incorrect). E: How does your hand feel to you? O: Normal. E: Tell me when I touch your hand. O: It feels numb. I can’t tell when you do or don’t. E: Lift it. (O obeys.) E: Now you can’t lift it. O: Yes I can (but he doesn’t). E: Now every time you try to lift your hand it will go down. Now where is it? O: In the air (incorrect). E: Are you awake or asleep? O: Awake (and he refuses suggestions di- rected to his left hand. The right hand is still anaesthetic.) E: You can’t keep your right hand down. Are you? O: Yes (incor- rect). The screen was then removed, whereupon O’s right hand was no longer suggestible, in spite of E’s insistence. O, however, made obvious efforts to resist, keeping an intent gaze on the hand and rubbing it with the other. When he looked away, it yielded to suggestions again. E: How does your hand feel? O: Kind of numb. Being placed once more behind the screen, the hand again obeyed. O then returned to the easy chair. E: Do you feel quite awake? O: Yes, but sleepy. Hypnotic STAGE 2: ; E: Now tell me what you were doing at the table. O: Writing. E: What? O: What you told me to do. E: What was that? O: I was shown a number. If it was in ink of one color, I was to make that number of circles across the paper; if two colors, circles for the digits in black ink, crosses for those in red across the paper. E: What was the number? O: 724. E: Of what color the ink? O: 7 and 4 black, 2 red. E: What did you write? O: Seven circles and two crosses below that and then four circles. E: What else? O: Wrote crosses and circles several times. (All the foregoing answers are correct.) E: Anything else? O: Couldn’t write all I wanted to. E: Why? O: Hand wouldn’t write everything I wanted. E: What did you want to write? O: All the instructions you gave me. E: Why couldn’t you? O: Because I couldn’t make my hand do what I wanted it to do all the time. E: What prevented? O: Because I was trying to prevent it. E: Trying to prevent what? O: I thought it must be doing something though I didn’t know it at the time; and so I tried to keep it from doing it.” E: Did anything else happen to that hand? O: Yes, you touched it several times, sometimes with your hand, sometimes with something sharp, but I didn’t know, at the time it occurred, that you touched me. E: How, then, can you know it now? O: I remember it now. SPLITTING THE MIND 55 E: What are you thinking of now? O: Nothing. E: Are you asleep? O: No. E: Do you feel in good control of yourself? O: Yes, if you want me to have control. E: What if I don’t? O: Then I don’t want to. By direction of E, who gave it unobtrusively, R here undertook to make suggestions to O, telling him to raise his hands. O did not obey. E: Did you hear that? O: I heard something, but I didn’t pay any attention to it, because I didn’t think it concerned me. O now followed E’s suggestion, which was a repetition of R’s. E: Does this feel like ordinary waking? O: No. E: How different? OO: More comfortable, care-free, no extreme of any kind. E: What does matter to you now? O: Nothing but what you want me to think of. E: Was your right hand under your control at the table? O: No. E: Why not? O: Because you didn’t want it to be. E: How did you know that? O: By the way you spoke. E: Were‘you aware of that at the time? O: No. E: Did you make a serious effort to recall at the table? O: Yes, but I didn’t feel like thinking about things. I tried to, but really didn’t want to. E: Was it a really serious attempt? O: Yes, because of the difficulties I had to overcome. E: What were the difficulties? O: Can’t explain them. E: Were you awake at the table? O: Not wholly. E: Was that experience like anything you know in real life? O: Very much like waking in the morning. Seems as though part of my body belongs to someone else, though I could control it if I wanted to. Post-HYPNOTIC STAGE: E: Do you recall anything that has been taking place? O: Not a thing. (E insists, but O aiso persists.) E: Does the table recall to you anything that has happened this after- noon? O: (Hestitates) I think I have been over there before, during this afternoon, but I didn’t think of it till you spoke of it. E: What is the most recent thing you can recall? O:I1 can’t say I recall the table; not sure I was over there—might have been. The last thing I can remember is “relax completely” (a direction given by E while inducing Hyp. 1). Probative character of this experiment: O selects and employs pertinent facts according to a plan, and writes about it; he also notes peculiar qualities of a touch stimulus; while in some sense unaware of it all and engaged in conversation and other mental employment ordinarily requiring much attention. Later O recalls it all without, meanwhile, having received information from any source outside himself. Associative relations among the several stages and subgroups: Hyp. 1 has a very slight connection with the voice-group of Int. and full connection with the hand-group; but, so far as the evi- 56 CHARLES T. BURNETT dence goes, without connection, unless indirect, with any later group. In Int. the hand-group is dissociated from the voice- group except that, under special conditions of mental set in the voice-group, a few stimuli belonging to the hand-group cause images within the voice-group. The two groups are united, at least to an important extent, in Hyp. 2. (The record shows no complete testing in this stage for all the items of each group of - Int.) Post-hyp. shows a very slight connection with Int. and no other. Comments: (1) The scope of the dissociated hand-group is to be noted. Included with it is a considerably greater touch-area than in the case of Observer H. Certain auditory items are split off with it. (2) The usual methods of directing attention, ordinarily effective, do not suffice to reunite the two groups. (3) The automatic writing was to a large extent spontaneous, 1.e., it functioned beyond the scope explicitly assigned by suggestion. (4) There is motor as well as sensory dissociation between the subgroups of Int. The voice-group is “deceived”’ as to its success, both in moving and in preventing the movement of the special motor organ of the hand-group. (5) The voice-group can “ feel” stimuli in the right hand when they do not exist, as well as fail to feel them when they do. (6) Vision, as a function of the voice-group, brings back the missing right-hand-touch func- tion. (7) The attempt of the voice-group to control the right- hand function brings into evidence new sensory items from that hand, viz., numbness, which persists even when vision restores it somewhat to the control of the voice-group. (8) Int. is felt as a sleepy stage. (9) O recalls that stage as one of cross purposes, inner opposition, and defeat, but as lacking at the time any insight into its own meaning. (10) The abnormal character of the subgroups is shown by the susceptibility of both to suggestion. (11) The indifference of O to his incapacity in Int. is like that of the hysteric for his lost functions. SPLITTING THE MIND 57 EXPERIMENT 12. May 18, 1921, 4:15 p.m. OPT Ca OMS LOE OSM yal oP Ba) Lae, Hypnotic Stace 1: Directions to O: On awaking you will go to the automatic-writing table. I will show you a piece of paper containing two numbers. You will perform the division of these numbers, the larger by the smaller, if they are given in ink of one color; the subtraction of the smaller from the larger, if in ink of different colors. Write the answer automatically. (The directions were repeated; and then) Do you understand? (Affirmative reply.) INTERIM STAGE: O goes to the table. E: Do you remember anything that has just taken place? O: No, I don’t remember anything that has happened. E: Are you quite awake? O: Yes. During the foregoing conversation O is writing the following: answer a problem of division or | subtraction. E: What is that (showing a card containing the numbers 27 and 9, both in black ink)? O: 27 and 9. ; E: What does it remind you of? O: The last experiment (with another observer on the same afternoon). E: What do you guess about it? O: I guess I am to perform some sort of a problem; but I don’t see how; for in the last experiment there was only one number and there are two in this. During the foregoing conversation O’s right hand has produced the following arrangements of digits in a space 254 x 134 inches. 3 3 3 3 SS. eon, a 3 eS 3 3 3 The lowest 3 in the left column was written last; it was fused with the first word of the next sentence written. This makes it probable, in default of any notation by E in the record, that these digits were produced in rows rather than columns. The regularity of the resulting figure was very nearly as precise as in this printed reproduction. The writing continued as follows: I am dividing 27 by 9 be | cause they are the same | color but I don’t know it. Here are given correctly both the solution of the problem and its statement. A test now made for anaesthesia of the writing hand was positive; but with this variant: Whenever any other part of the body was touched in this test O said yes; whenever the writing hand was touched he said nothing and gave no sign of perceiving it, except that the stimulated hand would make each time a vertical mark, arranging these in a row. This was done spontaneously, so far as E is aware. A test was now made to see whether stimuli on the anaesthetic hand could be shown to produce in O conscious effects of whose origin he was unaware. The hand was touched with the blunt end of a pencil the intended number of times, at the rate of about three in two seconds, according to the following series: 7, 3, 4, 1, 9, 2, 8, 6, 5. E: I want you to think of a one-place number. Think of counting the 58 CHARLES T. BURNETT units in it thus: one, two, three, four, for 4, etc. O: 1 thought of 7 (correct), but probably because it was the first number in the last experiment (which was a fact—724). : Think once more please. O: I thought of 3 (correct). : Why? O: Because, perhaps, 4 from 7 leaves 3. : Think again. O: All that seems to run in my head is that combination. : What? O: That 724 combination. : Think of a single one. O: 4 (correct). : Think of another. O: I don’t think of any special number. : Think again. O: No one number. : Single digit. O: I might say 4 (incorrect, a repetition of the preceding). : Once more. O: 9 (correct); 7 and 2 make 9. : Once more. O: 2 (correct). : Why? O: Because it’s another one of those numbers (724). = (Ley again. O: I don’t think of anything. : Try again to imagine. O: 7 (incorrect). : Again. O: 6 (correct)—one I hadn’t mentioned, so I thought I might as well try it. E: Again. O: 5 (correct). E: Why? O: 2 from 7 leaves 5 (harking back once more to 724). E: What have you been doing? O: Thinking up numbers. E: Is that all? Can you guess that you were doing anything you haven't mentioned? O: I might be writing, because that is what I generally do when I sit here with my hand behind the screen. E: Have you been aware of it this afternoon? O: No. E: Are you awake now? O: Yes. E: As much awake as when acting as clerk (recorder)? O: Not quite so much awake because I’ve just been asleep (referring to Hyp. 1). E: What are you thinking of? O: Nothing at all. At this point, for the four questions following, the record becomes obviously an incomplete picture of the experiment, but cannot well be omitted. (See record of Hyp. 2 for what should presumably have been entered here.) E: Can you put both hands down? O: I think so. E: Why do you say “I think so”? O: Because I wasn’t thinking of whether I was putting them down or not. E: I am going to shake hands with you. Are you now shaking hands with me? O: I don’t think I am. E: Do you feel my hand? O: No. Meanwhile there has been more writing produced spontaneously. It has been scattered over the period elapsing since the test for anaesthesia was made. Here is the record: Seventhree ... |... | one| nine | what a| what a| Give to ... | two to . . . ix | no I don’t feel as awake | but I can’t tell of course | I don’t know | awake I don’t|why I dowt fe . . «| Here are fragmentary references to the original problem, to an occasional question, and to some felt inhibition. E: Write your name now. Have you done so? O: 1 don’t think so (but he has). E: Now you will tell me whether you have written it or not. Have you done so? O: No (hand writes “yes”). ted teh td ted ted ted ted et tod tt td tl SPLITTING THE MIND 59 E: Now you will write whether your last answer (i.e., oral answer) was correct. Have you done so? O: No. (Hand has, however, written “ No.’”’) A test for anaesthesia of the writing hand was made about this time, O’s eyes being closed. : Do you feel that you have good control over both hands? O: No. : Where is your control least? O: In the right arm. : Can you do what you want to with it? O: No. : Why not? O: Because I don’t feel it. E: Write the name of this state and regain control of your right arm. (O writes “ Maine.”) Whether control was thereby regained does not appear in the record; for in answering the questions just preceding, O began to appear so obvi- ously passive that a new hypnosis was suspected. Being told to open his eyes he, at first, remained passive; but, after repeated suggestions, he conformed. E: Are you now awake? O: Yes. E: What is the last thing you remember? O: You were touching my hand several times. (This perhaps locates the onset of hypnosis in the foregoing record.) E: Do you recall anything about the right hand? O: No. This amnesia indicates that O did fall spontaneously into hypnosis while being tested for anaesthesia. The different tenor of his replies here is thus accounted for. The following questions were asked with the intent to test O’s present degree of suggestibility. E: You won’t understand what my next question means. What did you have for dinner to-day? O: We had—— E: Are you sure you can remember? O: I can tell you if I can recall. E: What? O: Eggs (correct, according to R). E: Now rub your hands over each other. Do you feel awake? O: Yes. E: As much as when acting as R? O: Just the same as when you asked the question before. (O had evidently recovered from his brief spontaneous hypnosis.) icomeomes me] Hypnoric STAGE 2: E: Tell me, please, what were you doing at the table? O: Writing different things for you. E: What did you write? O: 3 which was the answer to the problem. E: How could it be? O: How could it be anything else? E: How did you get it? O: Divided 27 by 9. E: Why divide? O: Because the ink was of one color. E: What else happened? O: I wrote what I was doing and answers to questions you asked. E: Did you know you were doing it? O: No. E: What else happened? O: That was all that I wrote—just answering questions. E: Any other experiences received by right hand? O: Yes, you touched it, raised it, made it go from side to side. (A part of the record above indicates that this may well have been true, but the record does not note it specifically.) E: What kind of touches? O: Sometimes with something very sharp, sometimes with finger (correct). ae E: Were you aware of this at the time? O: No. 60 CHARLES T. BURNETT E: What happened when your eyes were shut at the table? O: I was doing various things for you. E: Were you in the same sort of state as just before and after that? O: I think so. You said to wake up and I opened my eyes. E: Were you awake while at the writing table? O: No. E: Were you asleep? O: No. E: How describe the state? O: I didn’t know very much. E: What do you mean? O: 1 didn’t think of anything and couldn’t think of many things. : Are you awake or asleep now? O: I’m not asleep. : Do you feel as you do ordinarily during the day? O: No. : What is the difference? O: More comfortable and know more. : Know more? O: Yes. : What do you mean? QO: I can remember about things I don’t usually. : Can you illustrate? O: I can remember picking out portraits one afternoon, then writing about them, describing them. (This is a correct reference to a former experiment and events that occurred during hypnosis. The record shows no attempt to test O’s ability to recall them outside hypnosis. ) E: What are you thinking about? O: I was thinking about what I was telling you about. E: What was that? O: Picking out portraits. I remember last year not being able to speak, and writing you about it (all of which really occurred as O states, in hypnosis). E: Don’t you remember it when awake? O: I only remember about it; I don’t remember it. (O had had plenty of opportunity to learn about this outside hypnosis.) Here R attempted to make motor suggestions. No response. E: Why don’t you do that? O: Because I don’t want to. The same suggestions now made by E are accepted. E: Why do you do it now? O: I want to. E now gives O the suggestion that he cannot lower his raised arm, though trying hard to do so. This is accepted. E: Tell me about your effort in trying to put down your arm. O: It won't come. I’ve forgotten how to do it. E: To do what? O: To put it down. E: Now you can tell how to do it. (O then lowered his hand.) E: Can you recall answers to any other questions at the table? O: Yes, I put down a mark every time you touched me, to show you I knew you did it. E: Do you recall anything else? O: You told me to write yes or no to certain questions. You told me to write my name and whether my answer was right. E: Was your answer right? O: What I wrote was right. E: Was what you said right? O: No. E: Was it said truthfully? O: Yes, but I am so stupid I never know what is right and what isn’t. E: Do you know what I have been saying from time to time to Joe (R)? O: No, I haven’t noticed. E: Why? O: Because you haven’t been talking to me. E: Does your mind feel clear now? O: Yes. E: Clearer than when at the table? O: Yes. eoReReResMcofc SPLITTING THE MIND 61 PosT-HYPNOTIC STAGE: O remarks on awaking, that he seems to have been more fast asleep than usual. E: What do you recall? O: Nothing. E: What is the last thing you recall? O: Sitting in the easy chair. E: Does the table recall to you anything? O: The last experiment (i.e., one with another observer on the same afternoon). E: Does it recall to you any of your own activities? O: Yes, it does. E: Those of to-day? O: No. E: Do you recall anything else from to-day’s events (1.e., belonging to this experiment)? O: No. E: What is your general attitude toward what has gone on to-day? O: I don’t care. I don’t want to have to remember it, but would like to have it told to me. E: I will help you to recall. O: I don’t think I want to. E: Why? O: It’s like recalling a nightmare—too complicated for trying to remember. E: Does this mean that you have a disinclination for this experiment? O: No. When I wake up I feel relieved as though purged of terrible complications. E: Have you ever, when not here, revived in memory any of these experiments? O: No. I never recall the actual experiences. I think of the results. Probative character of this experiment: O gathers and inter- prets data and uses them to solve a problem—all according to a plan. He gathers other information, writes comprehendingly about the situation, and executes suggestions. Of all the fore- going functions he is in some sense ignorant. Yet afterward he is able to recall them all, without having received information, meanwhile, from any source outside himself. Associative relations among the several stages and subgroups: Hyp. 1 seems to have no direct associative relations with any later stage. Int. shows the following: The hand-group is dissociated from the voice-group completely except that stimuli belonging to the former produce uncomprehended effects in the voice-group. The voice-group, on the contrary, seems to be pretty closely associated with the hand-group. Both are reunified in Hyp. 2, and persist by the scantiest associations into Post-hyp. Comments: (1) O rationalizes falsely about the origin of certain experiences. (2) Stimuli belonging to the hand-group produce, in the voice-group, under conditions of appropriate mental set, effects whose real meaning in terms of external cause is not felt; and this is shown in eight trials out of ten. (3) 62 CHARLES T. BURNETT There is unusual spontaneity in the writing, expressing in a variety of ways the impulse to communicate. (4) The associa- tive appropriation of voice-group by hand-group, without the reverse, is clearly shown in the writing. (5) Int. is clearly not one of ordinary hypnosis, though obviously abnormal; it is not sufficiently suggestible. Yet, in this experiment, it is close enough to merge spontaneously into hypnosis. (6) The associative rela- tion of Hyp. 2 with remote hypnotic experiences is a confirmation of a relation already known. (7) Certain felt differences between Int. and hypnosis are described by O while in hypnosis. The former is felt as a state of neither sleeping nor waking, one of not knowing much, nor thinking of anything, nor being able to think of many things—a state of nightmare-like discomfort because of its felt complications: a state of stupidity. Hypnosis is not felt as sleep nor yet as waking-—a state of greater comfort and knowledge; of mental clearness; of unconcern about things not felt as intended for the hypnotized; of indifference to every- thing not felt as planned for him by E; yet the hypnosis that developed spontaneously in the midst of Int. did not seem in retrospect, to O, different from Int. About this, however, he speaks with less confidence. (8) O regards himself as truthful but stupid in Int. (9) The immediate cause of suggested paraly- sis is felt by O to be forgetting how to make the forbidden move- ment—an inhibition of associations. This mode of executing the suggestion seems to have been spontaneously selected. (10) O's memory in hypnosis seems sometimes a little sluggish. He has to be plied with questions in order to reveal his actual knowledge. Sometimes he seems monosyllabic; sometimes more talkative, opening unsuspected vistas of great interest. _ Had they been suspected, the neutral method of these experiments would have forbidden a direct inquiry of O. (11) The idea of what he may be doing in Int. is not sufficient to make O perceive that he actually is doing it. He cannot perceive certain acts merely by having his attention called to them. : SPLITTING THE MIND 63 EXPERIMENT 13. June 10, 1921, 9:30 a.m. CW IE C5 OFM = | OT SR he Sf Sy De ie 5 (Extensive records were made by E also, during the experiment. When not specially indicated O’s replies were given orally.) Hypnotic STAGE 1: Directions to O: When you awaken you will take your seat at the automatic-writing table. After you sit down there, no words uttered by me will have any meaning for you, until I request that you let me feel of your left hand, after which my words will once more have meaning. Your right hand, meanwhile, will be able to understand my words and to act automatically in accordance with them. (Directions carefully repeated ; and then) Do you understand? (Affirmative reply.) INTERIM STAGE: O wakens and takes his place at the table. E: Do you hear me? O: (Silent, writes) No, but I can hear. I won't hear. : E: Who are you? O: (Silent, writes) G.......... Pietadeeage (the two names in full). E: What are you doing? O: (Silent, writes) Answering you. E: Do you know that you are writing? O: (Silent, writes) No, but I am. E: What is the rest of you doing? O: (Silent, writes) Nothing. E: If you understand me write 6, if not write cow. O: (Silent, writes) 6 I can understand | but I think I can’t ...|.. . think I can’t At this point R begins to take part in the questioning, being largely prompted by E. The writing that accompanied it is inserted below, as there is no record, only internal evidence, to show the points at which it occurred. : Are you awake? O: Yes. : How long? O: Five minutes. : Do you know what you had for breakfast? O: Yes. : What? O: (Laughing) Scrambled eggs. : Do you hear me speak? O: (Silent.) : Do you hear me write? O: (Silent.) : Who else is here? (The answer if given is missing from the record, but O’s next reply indicates that he answered this question correctly.) R: Has he said anything to you? O: Asked if I were awake. (This probably refers to some question put to O on coming out of Hyp. 1— a not uncommon question.) : What did you say? O: That I was. : Did he say anything else? O: No. : Won’t you look at me? O: (Takes no notice.) wy Ganmwalaseew Ts) Bias. a selsie 2) Os Yes: : Have you looked at him? O: Yes. : Why don’t you reply to my questions? O: (Silent.) : Why don’t you reply to Dr. B........ ’s questions? O: He hasn't ed me any. : What is he doing? O: Writing. : What? O: Don’t know. : Have you any idea what it is? O: No. : Would you like to know? O: (Slightly laughing) Yes. : Why? O: No reason in particular. AMMAAAD AMAAMAA oo as AADAA 64 CHARLES T. BURNETT Here E walked in front of O, touched him, and leaned forward to look pretty closely into his eyes, but was ignored. R: What are you thinking about? O: Nothing. E: Can you feel my touch (slapping O’s left hand)? O: (Silent.) ReiGan you! teelhDraBisenea es ‘s) touch?) ,OecYes: (At this point something is apparently missing from the record.) R: Why hesitate in saying no? O: No what? R: To last question? O: Don’t know what it was. E: Why don’t you reply to my questions? O: (Silent.) E: Do you feel my touch (slapping O’s knee)? O: (Silent.) Here is the writing produced during the foregoing conversation. q .| No I think I can’t because I| can’t understand . . . because I can’t | understand I won't hear|I can’t understand so I can’t hear | but I really can can really can and am | Yes but I can’t answer The writing now ceases during the following test. R: Tell me if you feel a touch. O: What touch? R: Any touch. E then touches various parts of O’s body—legs, feet, left hand, right hand and right arm. O responds to all except those on the right hand and right arm, which is anaesthetic to the shoulder. (The record omits to state whether O’s eyes were open or shut.) The writing begins once more with the following questions: E: Why don’t you look at me? O: (Silent, writes) Can’t understand so can’t hear | but I can understand Re Why’ don’t: youtlookat; Dr Bea... * > ? O: Why should I? REED rv Be satires is going to pass in front of you and I want you to pay attention to him when he does. E walks in front of O, kneels to look into his eyes, touches his leg. O appears not to look at E but beyond him. R: Are you paying attention to him? O: Yes. R: Are you looking at him? O: Yes (incorrect to all appearances). Then E asks the question as arranged in Hyp. 1. E: Let me feel of your left hand. O: (Responds immediately, with a pleasant change of expression and a bit of surprise in his manner.) E: Do you feel my touch? O: (Eyes open) Yes. A test for anaesthesia of the right hand here gives positive results only as far as the wrist. E: Are you awake? O: Yes. E: What have you been doing since sitting here? O: Talking with Joe. E: What have I been doing? O: (Voice) I was looking at Joe all the time. (Hand writes, now and during the question following) Writing and asking questions which I couldn’t | understand so I couldn’t answer |I can understand you now but I | can now From this point forward, in this experiment, all the writing was pro- duced spontaneously, i.e., without intended suggestion by E so far as the record shows. E: Ves,. buts what-wasel: doing) Oem in.....: « h (as though about to speak, but in much hesitation.) E: What have I been doing? O: (Voice) I hope this good weather will keep up for a while, that we have been having so long, don’t you? (Hand) I don’t remember I | wont tell you those things because I \ can’t but of course I know SPLITTING THE MIND 65 E: (Evidently caught unawares) Yes—I’d like some rain myself. How did you happen to make that comment just then about the weather? O: Well, we've been having such good weather lately I hope it will keep up. E: What have you been doing while sitting here? O: (Voice) Talking with Joe for a while. (Hand) J have been . . . talking to Joe that’s right | them | but .. . cause I wouldn’t hear | you so I wouldn’t | answer E: What else? O: (Silent.) E: What else? O: That’s all I’ve been doing—except thinking. E: Thinking? What about? O: Thinking about the weather. Don’t you ‘think it would be nice to have it clear a while longer? E: What has your left hand been doing? O: I don’t remember. E: Your right hand? O: I don’t know. E: Your left leg? O: I don’t think it has been doing anything (laughs). E: Do you suspect yourself of having done anything? O: Such as what? E: Anything. O: I know I’ve been talking. E: Do you suspect yourself of having done anything? O: No. E: What.are you doing while hesitating? O: Thinking. E: Does this screen make you think of anything? O: I may have been writing.’ E: Were you conscious of it? O: No. E: Now I want you to think of some numbers. Think of counting it— LZ eon 0tes, etc: E begins to impress various numbers on the anaesthetic hand by touching it with his finger the requisite number of times, at the rate of about three touches in two seconds, using the following series, determined by drawing numbers that had been shaken up together—9, 1, 7, 6, 8, 2, 5, 4, 3. E: What number do you think of? O: I think of 9 (correct). E: How does it appear in your mind? O: Well, I just thought of it. E: Does it appear in the form of images? O: Yes. EB sVisuallyre, On Yes: E: How? O: (Voice) Brightest in a long string of numbers. (Hand produces what may perhaps be taken as two 9’s one under the other; -and under both a legible “you”; then) you have been touching my hand and tt | makes | me think of those numbers but I don’t know you are touching me E: Do you see any of the other numbers? O: Yes, this one (9) being in red. E: Once more, think of a number (two touches were given, one being ‘intended, the other accidental and not in the customary manner). : (Voice) I thought of 11 (incorrect). (Hand) Two touches. This 11. : Think again, please. O: 7 (correct). : Again. O: 6 (correct). : Again. O: 8 (correct). we Acainse ©): 2 (correct). : Again. O: 5 (correct). : Why any of these? O: (Voice) I just see them. (Hand) No I see them because I feel them though I don't Rpot | I feel them I’m telling you as well as|I know but I don’t know en| (margin of sheet reached here) enough to tell you right . . . BerAs in the first} cases..O Yes. BE: Any color? O: Red. E: Think again. O: 4 (correct). SReRcncRckcRe) 66 CHARLES T. BURNETT : Think again. O: 3 (correct). : What have you just been doing? O: Thinking of numbers. : Anything else? O: No. : Are you awake or asleep now? O: Awake. Tests for suggestibility here given were negative. E: Do you feel as usual? O: Just about. eoMesRcoMcs E: What is the difference? O: (Voice) I feel sleepy. (Hand) It isn’t’ sleepy its because I can’t remember or think | of anything new it makes me- so stupid | I think its being sleepy. E: Do you think you would be able to take an examination as you are now? O: I wouldn’t want to. E: Why? O: Too sleepy. E: Can you recall everything that has happened while you have been sitting here? QO: Yes, everything. E: Does it stand out pretty clearly in memory? O: Yes. E: What things stand out? O: Talking. E: Is that all? (E repeats the question and O hesitates.) O: (Voice) Yes, you’ve been touching me and I ’ve been thinking of numbers. (Hand) Of course I've been doing more but don’t | like you to ask me because. I don’t | know and I don’t like to seem so | stupid, but I think I know every- | thing but I don’t. I can’t rememb (runs off paper here) | what I do know: even very well | I can’t even remember don’t want to cant. | The foregoing writing was in process of production from the ime hes pertinent question was asked to the end of the next few questions. E: What day of the week is this? O: Friday (correct). E: What time of day? O: I don’t know. E: Morning or afternoon? O: Morning (correct). E: Can you give the time approximately? O: No, well, half past nine- (in reality an hour later. O gives the hour at which the experiment started). At this point, tests for anaesthesia of the writing hand were made, with: positive results as far as wrist. The writing thereupon ceased. To O,. whose eyes were still closed, E suggested various movements for right and left hands respectively. The left hand declined, the right (concealed) hand accepted, these suggestions, though O thought both hands were- equally under his control. In a single exception the right hand did not obey when O, however, thought it had. E: Why didn’t you answer my various questions while sitting here? O: I did. E: Was there no group of questions which you didn’t answer? O: No. (with a look of slight surprise at these two questions). E: How do you feel? O: A little bit sleepy. Hypnotic STAGE 2: E: What were you doing at the writing table? O: I was writing. E: What were you writing? O: I was writing answers to things you: asked me. : : For example? O: You asked me if I could hear you. : Could you? O: Yes. : : Why didn’t you say? O: Because you told me to write. : Could you really hear me? O: Yes, I heard you. i i os : What did you say when I asked you that? O: I didn’t say; I wrote.. ——— SPLITTING THE MIND 67 ia Did pyouvtell Beecess 0.4 (R) that you heard me? O: I was writing all the time. E: Did you tell him that you heard me? O: Perhaps I said I didn’t (correct), but that didn’t count. I was writing you the answer. E: Why didn’t it count? O: Because J was answering you by writing you the answer. (Much emphasis on the I.) E: Who was talking if you were writing? O: (Silent). E: Why don’t you answer the question? O: J was answering you by writing (again the emphasis). E: Then who was answering B.......... by talking? O: Well, it was my voice, but I was answering you by writing. E: Who controlled your voice? O: I don’t know. E: What else was going on at the table? O: You were touching me. E: What sort of touches? O: With your finger, your foot, and some- thing sharp (the latter reserved here, as always, for the anaesthetic area). E: Where did you feel the sharp touches? O: On my right hand. E: Why didn’t you tell me so at the time? O: I thought I couldn't feel it, but I could. E: What other things did I do? O: You were writing and kept touching my hand. >What else? O: You walked around. : Did you notice me doing it? O: Yes. : Why didn’t you respond to me? O: I did. : Why didn’t you look at me? O: I did see you. : Did you look at me? O: No, I couldn't. : Why not? O: I don’t know. : Think hard. O: It wouldn’t let me. : (Not quite catching answer) “It” wouldn’t? O: It wouldn’t let me__something wouldn’t—I wouldn't. E: Why do you change from “it” to “something” and then to “I’’? O: I couldn’t look at you because—— E: Because what? (O shows signs of uneasiness, tension in the face muscles, while the same question is given three times.) Because I just couldn’t look at you, that’s all. E: Do you recall any other things you said at the table? O: That I said? E: Yes. O: I said different numbers (correct). E: Why did you say those numbers? O: Because I made them be said. E: What do you mean? O: You were touching my hand and I made those numbers; I made them be said. E: How did you happen to select those numbers? O: I didn’t select them, you touched them on my hand. E: What if I did touch your hand? O: I wanted to let you know that I knew you were touching me. E: Did you know at the time you wanted to let me know? O: (With emphasis) J knew. E: Was there anything that you didn’t know? O: Yes. E: What? (O again shows signs of uneasiness and effort. E repeats the question.) O: I don’t know what. E: You can give no further information about that? O: (After effort) I couldn’t say the things I wanted to, nor see what I wanted to, nor do what I wanted to, nor hear what I wanted to. Of course, I really could Co es os os bd ot 68 CHARLES T. BURNETT do all those things, but I didn’t think so—and I knew it, but they wouldn’t let me. E: Who were “they”? O: (Half mumbling) I don’t know who they were. (Then, clearly) It wasn’t they; it was me, but it wasn’t me—— E: If it wasn’t “me” who was it? (Correcting himself) No, you say it was “me” and wasn’t “me.” How can that be? O: Well, it wasn’t me, but had something to do with me—I don’t know what. E: Who is really talking to me now? O: I am. E: The same “I” that knew all about these things at the table? O: Yes, of course. E: While you were at the table, was your “I” answering B..... APS ? O: No, I wasn’t. E: Was it answering me? O: Yes. E: With your voice? O: No, by writing. E: What was using the voice? (O shows some effort or uneasiness. E repeats the question.) O: I don’t know. E: Were the answers given at the table honest answers? O: (Promptly) Yes. E: The answers given by your voice? O: I guess they were honest. E: Why do you speak so guardedly? O: They weren’t true and may not have been honest; but I suppose they were. E: Were you in doubt of them at the time? O: 7 (Emphasized) knew they weren’t so. E: Why didn’t you give me the true answers? O: Because I couldn't say them. I wrote you the true answers mostly. E: Does that experience seem to you just like telling a lie ordinarily? © O: (Earnestly) Oh no. J was telling the truth all the time. E: Even when you answered with your voice? O: Jt didn’t know any better. E: Why do you say “it”? O: Because I couldn’t use it (meaning, apparently, the voice), I was shut up and could only get out through my hand. E: Are you answering my questions on the basis of direct memory? OUny es: E: Are you consciously affected by any theories of Psychology? O: (In some surprise) Am I what? E: (Repeats.) O: I don’t believe so. E: Are you trying to report what you seem to have observed directly in yourself? O: Yes. E: Has it been hard to give the answers? O: (Quickly) Yes. E: Why? O: (Pausing) Because I can’t explain them myself. E: What do you mean by “explain”? O: When you ask me why of all these different things, I don’t know why. E: Have you any doubt about the correctness of your report about the facts? O: (Quickly) No. I don’t know that I have said clearly what I mean. E: Can you compare your experience at the writing table with any experi- ence you have had in ordinary life? O: (Quickly) No. E: (After a pause) What are you thinking about now? O: Nothing. E: Would you like to wake up now? O: (Promptly) I don’t care. E: What have you just recently been hearing? O: Your writing— mandolin playing (both correct). SPLITTING THE MIND 69 E: When you were writing automatically, did you make anything beside letters and words?? O: I tried to make some letters sometimes that I couldn’t. E: Do you know what you made in place of those letters? O: No (doubtfully). Just a scrawl, I guess. E: What started you to write from time to time, while sitting at the table? O: When you asked me questions that weren’t being answered right. E: What was that noise, George (a horse galloping past)? O: A thumping. E: What may have produced it? O: I don’t know. E: Are you asleep or awake or neither? O: Nearly asleep. E: Do you seem to yourself to be dreamy? O: No. E: Will the “I” present when you wake up be the same as that engaged in writing? O: I hope so. E: Shall you be able to tell? O: I don’t know. E: Will the “I” present when you wake up be the same as that controlling your voice at the table? O: I hope not. E: Were you uncomfortable at the table? O: I don’t know what you mean. E: Did you feel uncomfortable there? O: (Silent, shows signs of uneasiness. ) E: (Repeats question.) O: I don’t remember. E: Do you remember any uncomfortable experiences since you went to sleep? O: Yes. E: What? O: I couldn’t see what I wanted to; nor say what I wanted to; nor sometimes write what I wanted to—then I could only make a scrawl. Thinking O had said something about hearing, missed in the process of note-taking, E asked the next question. E: What did you say about hearing? (In the answer to this question there appears a possibly important difference between the records made by R and E respectively—important because one of these in form contradicts a statement by O made earlier in this stage.) O: (According to R) I could hear all I wanted to. I could hear better than the others. (According to E) I could always hear everything. (Then, after a pause) I could hear better than the others. (This second sentence, alike in both records, probably means, “better than I could use the other senses.”) E: What prevented your writing what you wanted to? O: The same “they” that wouldn’t let me see what I wanted to wouldn’t let me write what I wanted to. E: About what time is it, do you think? O: I don’t know. E: Guess. O. About noon (correct). E: Why do you say that? O: You asked me to guess. E: By what do you judge? (After a pause) Because I hear different sounds—whistles and things that blow around noon. (Such a whistle had sounded in the distance.) E: Do you feel now just as you do ordinarily? O: No. E: What is the difference? O: I’m not awake now. E: Do you feel all right? O: Yes. E: Would you like to remember all that you have been experiencing? O: Don’t know. Post-HYPNOTIC STAGE |: E: Do you know what time it is? O: About 10 o’clock. (O had been hypnotized about 9:30. It was now about 12:00.) 70 CHARLES T. BURNETT E: Why do you say that? O: (Smiling) I don’t know; it seems about that time. E: How do you feel? O: All right. E: Awake? O: Waking up (laughs, then after a pause, spontaneously) I feel as though I had been very deeply asleep—miles away. E: Do you remember anything that has occurred this morning since you have been asleep? O: No. E: Try. O: (After a pause) I can’t (with a smile). E: Does that table (pointing to the writing table) remind you of anything? O: Yes, experiments carried on there. E: Anything, occurring this morning, I mean? O: No. Hypnotic STAGE 3: E: What were you doing at the writing table? O: I was writing answers to your questions. E: What were some of those answers? O: I was writing that I could hear you but couldn’t answer you. E: What else? O: I could see you but couldn’t look at you. (If this refers to a written answer, as the form of E’s question implies, it is incorrect; if merely to events of the preceding stage, as O’s answer to the next question implies, it seems to be correct, according to the circumstantial evidence. ) E: Anything else? O: You asked me why I didn’t answer you. O was then wakened, after being given the suggestion that he would recall everything when awake. Post-HYPNOTIC STAGE 2: E: Are you awake? O: Yes. E: Do you remember anything? O: Yes, but it all seems like a dream, not like anything real. E: What do you recall? O: I was thinking about sitting at the table writing. (Then, in astonishment) It doesn’t seem real or possible! E: What do you recall? O: (Pausing briefly) Why, I was recalling the situation there. What a funny one it was! If (smiling) I am remem- bering it rightly. It seems weird. E: What was it? O: I seemed to be divided in two. I remember thinking of one thing and at the same time thinking of another—trying (R’s record gives “ wanting”) to do something and not letting myself do it. Terrible mix-up! E: Which of these are you now? O: Both, I guess (laughing), if I remember. I don’t remember much about it. Seems more like a nightmare than any real thing. : E: Does it disturb you to recall it? O: It’s not pleasant to recall by any means. If not interested I wouldn’t. (R notes here in a parenthesis that it “had been suggested that he would be interested.” There is no other record of such a suggestion in that form.) E: Interested in what sense? O: To find out about it; it’s such an interesting condition. } E: Do you remember anything else? O: Vague generalities—nothing much in detail—like a dream. Chief thing that stands out is doing two things at once. Horrible to think about! E: Why horrible? O: Because you don’t feel that you were yourself. Terribly confused state of affairs. (This in a pleasant tone of voice.) SPLITTING THE MIND 71 E: When you have previously recalled things by my help, have they faded away? QO: Yes. I remember them only as they were reported to you (i.e., as given in a post-hypnotic state). E: Do you later remember that they felt horrible; or do they continue to feel horrible? O: Usually one thinks of oneself as having judgment and fitting things together; and I don’t seem to have been present in that sense though present somehow in both the experiences of that time; but it seems wholly alien to me. E: (Repeats the question.) O: They continue to feel horrible. E: Are you unhappy to recall it? O: Yes, it isn’t pleasant though it is interesting. Probative character of this experiment: O was able to gather information, and act upon it, in the way of making discriminating replies, at the same time that he was, in some sense, unaware of it all, and otherwise occupied. Afterward, however, he was able to recall it, though meanwhile receiving no information about it from any source outside himself. Associative relation among the several stages and subgroups: Hyp. 1 seems not to be recalled in Int. by either partial group, though experiences in this stage are determined in great part by the former. Hyp. 1 is, however, recalled in Hyp. 2; but there is no reference to it in any later stage. Of the component groups in Int. the hand-group is dissociated from the voice-group, though stimuli belonging to the former produce distorted effects in the latter. At least a part of the voice-group was included in the hand-group. These groups are partly united in Hyp. 2, disappear in Post-hyp. 1, reappear in Hyp. 3, and by suggestion in Post-hyp. 2, but incomplete in details and rather vague, yet in some respects more fully than in Hyp. 2, e.g., in recalling discomfort and its character. Comments: (1) The interference between the partial groups of Int. is to some extent mutual. The voice-group can’t see (look), remember, hear, get touch perceptions, adequately. The hand-group feels itself limited, for expression, to the hand, and even there feels hampered. (2) There is an apparent contradic- tion in O’s references, during Hyp. 2, to his auditory function in Int. (“I couldn’t . . . hear what I wanted.” ‘I could always hear everything ”’ or “could hear all I wanted to”’). This con- tradictory appearance is removed, if we regard these utterances as 72 CHARLES T. BURNETT referring to different component groups of Int. Such an assump- tion is justified by the following facts: O makes such a distinction elsewhere in language which he insists on, in spite of its apparent contradiction. When he said, “ I could hear all I wanted to,” he added a reference to the superiority of hearing to the other sensory functions. This utterance seems best explicable by reference to the emphasis laid on hearing in the original suggestion (for he has no apparent auditory defect in the normal state); and, by implication, thus, to belong to the hand-group. (3) The sugges- tion that E’s words would have no meaning, though it really left room apparently for response to crude hearing of E, developed in O a systematized auditory anaesthesia for E, accompanied, spontaneously, by a systematized motor defect—the inability to look at E. O’s assertion that he was looking at E, being to all appearances false, however much it needs explanation, cannot be regarded as having any weight against this conclusion. Though anaesthesia toward E was limited, he was not wholly ignored. His touches on certain parts of O’s body were recognized as by - him. O asserted in Hyp. 2 that he could “see” E but could not “look” at him. (4) The events of deep hypnosis can, by sug- gestion, be made to persist more or less definitely after waking; but in the case of this observer they quickly fade and only persist thereafter indirectly, as memories of what he once said that he © recalled. (5) Some of O’s replies lead one to ask whether he was in distress during this experiment. The external signs of distress were no greater than the foregoing record shows. O's own language must be interpreted in that light. The distress, such as it was, is apparently that of felt confusion of ideas. (6) The writing hand is evidently guided by stimuli received as it moves. (7) Dissociation is indicated in the delusion of motor control over the writing hand. (8) The speech of O in Hyp. 2 and the automatic writing show the felt confusion reigning within, by the difficulties with pronouns. “TI” is used indiffer- ently in both speech and writing for the voice-group and the hand-group. “Me” is used likewise in speech. O seems, how- ever, at times to prefer to identify “I” with the hand-group, which, to him, seems less “ stupid” for the apparent reason that SPLITTING THE MIND 73 it knows more of what happened and can recall more. Observer J. L. B. preferred the voice-group. A tendency to reject some- thing from the scope of the “I” is indicated by placing elsewhere the inhibitory power, whose effects he has felt. He calls this variously “it,” “ something,” “they,” and, almost in the same breath, “I,” indicating a felt unity even in the dissociation. It seems possible that this line of distinction be drawn between the hand-group and the voice-group. (9) The restoration of mean- ing to E’s spoken words, by means of the procedure indicated to O in Hyp. 1, did not bring to anend Int. The writing continued. (10) The hand-group included, at its time of greatest extent, touch and kinesthetic sensations from the right hand and right arm, auditory percepts of E, and a range of items, identical with or referring to a large part, at least, of the voice-group. (11) External signs of effort, tension, appeared in four recorded instances, of which three, and possibly four, were concerned with attempts to answer questions about the voice-group of Int. (couldn’t look; didn’t know what it was he didn’t know; didn’t know who was using his voice; couldn’t recall whether or not he felt uncomfortable at the table. These are all concerned with present or past inhibitions). (12) Time orientation is disturbed in the latter part of Int. and in the beginning of Post-hyp. 2; it appears to be normal in Hyp. 2. PAR LTS CONFIRMATORY EXPERIMENTS SECTION 1. EXPERIMENTS I-V (This group of five experiments is defective in minor ways, according to our canon, but yet seems to be strictly probative. ) EXPERIMENT I. Jan. 18, 1920, 4 p.m. O2-GOER Fi. Cae, (In this experiment the records were made by E, who was the only person present besides O.) Hypnotic Stace 1: When O had been hypnotized, he was told that, on awaking, he would be given a sheet of paper on which two numbers would appear that were to be added, and that, on being rehypnotized he was to give the answer — at once. With regard to automatic writing, the record shows no indication as to whether any suggestion was given. This omission was discovered when the record was being later examined for interpretation, and this omission noted thereon—a further note being added to the effect that, according to the “clear memory” of E no such suggestion had been given. INTERIM STAGE: On waking, O changed his seat to one by a table. He was given a sheet of paper and told to write the first stanza of “America.” This he did. On the upper left and lower right corners of this sheet were the numbers 78.and 47 respectively. A screen was then so placed as to conceal his right hand and forearm, a pencil was put into that hand, and a sheet of paper placed conveniently. O was now engaged by E in conversation, during which O was asked after a time whether he was doing anything with his pencil. Nothing but making crosses and meaningless marks, was the reply. Meanwhile the right hand was making the following record in a sprawling, interrupted fashion: 78, 47, 78 Page (all the foregoing written in a kind of conglomerate mass) | tells wh n (which number) | sum of wh | numbers which | are o (one or on?) | would be on| the paper and then | tell you what they | were when you asked | the At length O was asked to return to the arm chair to be rehypnotized. | Hypnotic STAGE 2: O gave the correct answer 125 at once, orally. E: Where did you get the numbers? O: (After an obvious effort) That’s the funny part. I don’t know where they were. I don’t think you told me. 74 SPLITTING THE MIND 75 E: How did you get the number (i.e., the sum)? O: First thing that came into my head. I don’t think I saw it. Post-HYPNOTIC STAGE: O stated in reply to general questions that he remembered nothing of either trance state nor what numbers were used, nor how he got them; but he recalled well the conversation of Int. Then occurred the following attempt to remove the inhibition: E: Do you recognize the number 78? O: (After a brief pause) Yes, I think that must be one of them. Sounded familiar (correct). E: Do you recognize 125 (the sum)? O: (After a brief pause) No, I don’t believe that was one. E: Do you recognize 47? O: I think it was forty-something. It might be 46 (partly incorrect). E: (Looking steadily at O) Look at me. Now you may think hard and recall everything in the experience. O: (After pause and apparent effort) No, I can’t recall. Placing hand on O’s forehead, E, with a confident manner, tells him to think hard and try to recall. Then, after a pause and apparent effort to recall, O writes: ‘They were on a paper, on the corners” (correct). O substituted writing for speaking at E’s request, as a new observer was coming into the room when O was about to make reply. Probative character of this experiment: In Int. two dissociated groups of mental items are indicated; ‘“‘two,’’ because they are different in content, and lead to different expressions in voice and hand, respectively; ‘‘ dissociated,” because one at least—the voice- group—does not know the meaning of what the other is doing; “mental,” both of them, because, according to the standard admitted in the ordinary affairs of life, the only one in doubt, viz., the hand-group, implies recall of experiences of Hyp. 1, viz., the type of task suggested, and of the special numbers, just previously seen, by which the task was to be executed. There is no objective evidence that the perception of the num- bers was co-conscious, nor could O recall the hand-group in any later stage. The Memory Test thus fails. Associative relations among the several stages and subgroups: The voice-group contains items about right-hand movements but not their correct meaning, substituting “dots and dashes” for what was really significant script. Hyp. 1 seems to be quite dis- sociated from this group but not from the hand-group, which is so peculiarly affected by the memory from Stage 1 to the effect that the answer to the problem is to be given in Hyp. 2, that this hand- group cannot quite succeed, even in automatic writing, to reveal 76 CHARLES T. BURNETT the answer in advance. The hand possibly starts to write it but stops short. (“sum of wh | numbers which | areo”). In Hyp. 2 there is a curiously complete suppression of Hyp. 1. The task set in the latter is executed, but that it is a task and has been com- pleted is not known. The suppression of Int. seems almost com- plete; that there were number data seems to be known, but their source is not known. It was impossible to discover in this experi- - ment whether the actual solution of the problem was performed by the hand-group or in a very brief hypothetical transition stage, developing at the beginning of the second hypnosis and disappear- ing with the attainment of the answer. By O in Hyp. 2 the number, i.e., the sum, was felt as appearing without indication of origin. These two hypnotic stages were thus in some re different in status, not coextensive. In Post-hyp. there is partial association with the hand-group of Int. I say “partial’’ because of the evidence above that items were present in the earlier which were absent in the later. There is no manifest lack in the association of the voice-group with the later stage. Conversation was recalled. But the suppression of both hypnotic stages seems to be complete. It is not to be supposed that the full range of association- and inhibition-relations among the foregoing stages and subgroups is included in the facts just cited. Other tests, omitted in this experiment but fortunately included in others, would be required for complete determination. We cannot tell whether the number perception of Int. belonged to both partial groups or only to the hand-group, though a straw pointing to the latter exists in this fact, that in Post-hyp. the conversation of the voice-group was promptly recalled, whereas the source of the numbers was recalled only after considerable insistence by E. This seems to indicate that the two bits of experience did not have quite the same status in Int. EXPERIMENT II. ; April 20, 1920, 3:45 p.m. LS sn et alt 5 7 1B OFA We Ry Goto: (This experiment immediately followed one that was a complete failure because O remembered in the Interim Stage the events of Hypnotic Stage 1.) SPLITTING THE MIND 77 Hypnotic STAcE 1: Directions to O: You will multiply two numbers. The first is 59; the second is the number of white boxes on the shelf opposite you. When rehypnotized, you will give the answer at once, raising your hand the moment you begin thinking of the problem. (An amnesia suggestion was also given. The number of boxes was 6. These were the usual pamphlet boxes of a library. The record does not show whether they were a specially arranged group, or the set that usually stood among many closely packed folders also opposite O. His later reference te folders indicates the latter. If so, E cannot, of course, say that O did not already know the number of these. There was nothing, however, in the usual course of events in the room, to call his attention to them, so far as E knows.) INTERIM STAGE: E: Tell me what has happened. O: I can’t. E: Try. O: (After long pause) It seems as though I knew, but I can’t remember anything in particular—much like trying to remember a dream; only I usually remember something of a dream; in this case, less. E: Have you been doing anything, since you woke up, that has any connection with anything that happened in your sleep? O: No. I can think of things that might have something to do with it; but don’t think they would with what you’d ask me. E: What were these things? O: What I was going to do after I left here; and other casual things—the folders on the shelves opposite, books, etc., because I always think of what I’m looking at. Hypnotic Stace 2: O raised his hand and after about 2 seconds said 354 (correct). E: What is that? O: The answer to the problem. E: When did you do it? O: When talking to you. I didn’t know I was doing it then. E: Why did you raise your hand? O: Because you told me to. E: When? O: When I began to think of the problem. E: Did you know the answer when you raised your hand? O: I think I did. E: Why did you wait so long before giving it? O: I didn’t think of it right away. E: But you did when you raised your hand (not necessarily, of course, according to the strict letter of the instructions). O: I don’t remember when I raised it (though he seemed to remember that shortly before). E: Did you try to recall, before you were rehypnotized, what happened in the previous hypnosis? O: Yes. I knew it, but could not recall it. E: Were you answering honestly? O: Yes. I didn’t know it. then; but I do know now that I did then. I wasn’t conscious of it then. E: When did you notice the boxes? (It would have added confirmatory detail had E tried first to evoke the knowledge—if it existed—that boxes were in question.) O: As soon as I opened my eyes. E: Did you know what you wanted of those boxes? O: Not then, but now I do. E: Why did you forget your experience? O: Because you told me I’d forget. E: Are you asleep? O: No. E: Are you awake? O: No. 78 CHARLES T. BURNETT E: What, then? O: Hypnosis. E: What does it feel like? O: Mostly like sleeping. Post-HYPNOTIC STAGE: E: Do you remember what took place? O: No. Probative character of this experiment: Having forgotten the plan provided by E, O gathers data according to that plan, while in some way unaware of so doing, afterwards recalling both, with- out access to any information outside himself; asserting (unveri- fied) that he had at the same time been performing co-consciously a multiplication, in further execution of the plan; asserting, also, co-consciousness about the plan, viz., that he both knew it and did not know it. The objective evidence shows that the multiplication was indeed performed; but not beyond a doubt that it was all done in the Interim Stage. It is only the taint of suspicion attaching to the source of the data that prevents it being included in the probative group of Part II. Associative relations among the several stages and subgroups: Hyp. 1 is very vaguely associated with (‘‘known”’ to) the dominant group of Int. and fully with the subdominant group. It is also associated with Hyp. 2, but not with Post-hyp. The subdominant group of Int. is dissociated from the dominant group © and reunited with it in Hyp. 2, while both are dissociated from Post-hyp. Hyp. 2 is also dissociated from the latter. EXPERIMENT III. April 28, 1920, 2 p.m. Piro iad Bos Ee Ga bas: Re ves Ws Hypnotic Stace 1: E gave the following directions to O: When you awake you will be given a chance to write automatically. You will be shown a paper containing several digits. For each digit you will make the corresponding number of marks— circles for black-ink digits, crosses for red-ink digits, arranging them, for each digit, in a row beneath the marks for the preceeding digit, and+you will not be aware of what you are doing. (This was said carefully twice; and then) Do you understand? (Affirmative reply.) INTERIM STAGE: O does not recall what happened in the preceding stage; cannot tell; cannot get it at all. He then takes his place at the writing table. SPLITTING THE MIND 79 E: Do you know what you are going to write? O: No. E: Do you expect me to tell? O: Yes, or else I wouldn’t know what to >write. Test shows that writing hand is not now anaesthetic. E: What did you say you were going to write? O: You haven't told me.. Paper is now shown to O, containing 397, the 9 in black ink, the other digits in red. E: Does it mean anything to you? O: No. E: Did you do anything with it? O: No, it meant nothing to me. E: How do you pronounce it? O: 397. O has, however, been making crosses and circles that carry out correctly the suggestion given in Hyp. 1. Test shows that no touches on the writing hand are referred to it. (Record leaves it in doubt whether these were referred to the arm on that side.) O is now shown the number 246, the 4 in red ink, the other digits in black. E: What does that mean? O: 246. It doesn’t mean or recall anything. As before, the writing hand has been executing correctly the original suggestion. Test shows that the hand is anaesthetic. E: What did red ink mean? O:I1 don’t know any more than what black ink did. E: Think you can’t tell us what it meant? O: No. E: It recalls nothing? O: Not a thing. E now observes that the hand is writing. E: What are you doing with your hand? O: Not doing anything with it. E: Now what did black ink mean? O: I don’t know what it meant. Didn’t mean anything. E: Can you name all the men in your fraternity? (O gives an extended list.) Tests again show anaesthesia of the writing hand, which has been producing the following script: I was to make crosses|when there was red ink and | circles with the black | and the numbers of | digits I was to make the| numbers equal to them | on the paper. (New sheet.) Black ink meant to make | circles equal to the number of | digits Here are the correct replies to the questions which O has, at the same ‘time, been declaring his inability to answer, and they are not written in response to any suggestion that E is aware of having given. The screen being now removed and the writing hand touched in O’s sight, he responded to every touch, declaring that this touching of the hand seemed like a new experience. E: Have you anything more to say about your experience in this experiment? O: No. E: Have you told all about your inner experiences? O: Yes, practically all. E: Can you squeeze out anything else that I might be interested in knowing? O: No, not a thing that is at all important. E: Have I just asked you your name? O: No. E: Sure? O: Yes, absolutely. Being pressed to report all he can that is pertinent, O continues. O: I remember a feeling of a length of time, of events happening without meaning—in the chair before coming to the table. E: What events without meaning? O: Those in hypnosis—a sense of things happening, but I don’t know what they were. 80 CHARLES T. BURNETT E: Is it ever a bare blank? O: Yes, but not this time. E: Are you awake? O: Yes. E: Are you sure you are not now in hypnosis? O: Yes. Tests for suggestibility fail. Hypnotic STAGE 2: E: What do you remember? O: I knew what it was all the time; but I didn’t know it myself. I knew it, but couldn’t think of it—couldn’t think of it at all; but I really knew it all the time. E: You were playing a game on us, weren’t you? Deceiving us? O: No, for I didn’t know. E: You mean that you didn’t, and yet did, know? O: No, I really didn’t know it then—couldn’t think of it, but really knew it. Like knowing a. name and not being able to think of it; but more so, for in remembering a name you know that there is a name, but I didn’t know that there was. anything to remember. E: Shall you be able to remember when you wake up? O: No, for I never do. E: Can we believe these statements of yours? O: Yes. EeuWhatawouldsyotesave tte lies eee: (a visitor at this experiment doubted everything? Could you say anything in answer? O: No, for there’s nothing else to say. E: Would you like help in recalling these experiences when you wake up? QO: I don’t care. He was then told to waken when L.......... should rap. Not accepting this suggestion, O was told to waken when E should count three (a very common mode of wakening in these experiments). Accepted: O thereupon. is fully awake. Post-HYPNOTIC STAGE: E: Can you remember anything that took place? O: No. I feel as though, I had been through a nightmare—feel confused, a disagreeable experience. E: Why nightmare? O: It felt like trying to run and not being able. Probative character of this experiment: The evidence consists: in the production of written signs according to complex directions,. which involved getting new information from the environment, also correct answering of questions, all of which was apparently unknown to another mental group, simultaneously present and! intelligently active. At a later time O professes to know both of these preceding groups of experience, though, meanwhile, hav- ing access to no information outside himself. Unfortunately the records show no experimental check on the correctness of his. feeling that he knew; the Memory Test was not fully applied. , Associative relations among the several stages and subgroups: In Int. the hand-group has associations with Hyp. 1, while at first the voice-group seems quite without such, though later very vague SPLITTING THE MIND 81 memories recur. As between the two subgroups the hand-group is dissociated from (not “ known” to) the voice-group, so far as we know the items in that group, except that vision and hearing seem shared between them, at least to an extent. There were no tests as to whether the voice-group is, in turn, dissociated from (not “known ”’ to) the hand-group. Hyp. 2 reunited both groups of Int.—according to O’s assertion, which, however, was not further tested. No tests were made for direct connection between the two hypnotic stages. Post-hyp. shows vague associations from earlier stages. The present evidence does not permit us to decide as between Int. and Hyp. 2. The only reported memory is that of a felt inhibition. There is apparently no association with Hyp. 1, but O was not pressed particularly on this point. EXPERIMENT IV. April 30, 1920, 2:30 p.m. Re ata Wis La er Ce a SP CAG Dee & Hypnotic Srace 1: Directions to O: _When you waken you will be given a chance to write automatically. You will be shown a piece of paper with digits on it. For each digit you will make the corresponding number of marks—dashes for those in black ink, triangles for those in red, arranging them in rows under each other. You will not be aware of what you are doing, nor will you remember this suggestion. (These directions were repeated; then) Do you understand? (Affirmative reply.) INTERIM STAGE: O is able to recall many details of events in the preceding hypnosis— events concerned with testing the depth of hypnosis; but he does not mention the foregoing directions. Being seated at the table, the right hand behind a screen and holding a pencil, he states in reply to a question, that this situation does not remind him of anything occurring this afternoon. (This was the first experiment of the day.) He is now shown a paper containing the number 4296, the outside digits in black, the inner in red. E: What does this remind you of? O: Nothing except George’s experi- ment yesterday afternoon (describing it). (The two experiments were alike in form, but differed in content—1z.e., in the digits selected and in the marks to be made by O. Hence, knowledge of the earlier could not insure a correct performance of the present one.) E: Does it make you think of anything else? O: No. The numbers don’t stand for anything to me, either. Meanwhile his hand has made 4 dashes, in horizontal series; and, simi- larly, below this, 2 triangles, 7 dashes, and 6 triangles, each series under the preceding. (The first two are correct; the third should have been 9 and in triangles; the fourth should have been in dashes.) 82 CHARLES T. BURNETT To O is now shown a paper containing the number 6724, the digits alter— nately red and black. E: What are you doing with your hand? O: Moving it around. E: What are you making? O: Nothing—just moving it around. Tests for anaesthesia were negative. Meanwhile O’s hand has made the following five groups of triangles and dashes: (1) 7 triangles, 7 dashes, 2 triangles, 4 dashes (all correct except the first). (2) (Correct group.) (3) (Correct group.) (4) (Correct group.) (5) (Group showing confusion and not easily decipherable.) This perseverance in fulfilling the suggestion by repetition of the execu- tion, matches the instances of word- and phrase-repetition in automatic writing. Such multiplying of instances was not contemplated in the original suggestion. O is next shown the marks he had been making. E: Do these recall anything to you? O: No, except what George was doing yesterday. E: Do they mean anything to you? O: I imagine that the triangles mean one thing, the dashes another. E: Do they remind you of anything in your own experience? O: No. BF naghieli STAGE 2: : What were you doing when sitting at the table? O: Writing. : What? O: (Repeats the directions given in Hyp. 1.) : Did you do this? O: Yes. : Did I show you the paper on which you made these marks? O: Yes. : What did you say? O: 1 imagine it was like George’s experiment ventecday (substantially correct). E: When I asked if it recalled any part of your own experience, what did you say? QO: I said no. E: Was that the truth? O: Yes. E: Were you aware of what the hand was doing? O: 1 know it was moving. E: Did you know what it was making? O: No. E: How could that be? O: You told me I wouldn’t remember. E: You say you remember now what you were doing then? O: (No answer.) E: Did you know you were writing those symbols? O: I knew the hand was moving. E: Do you think you did it correctly? O: Yes. E: Did you have any doubt while doing it? O: I don’t remember doing it. E: What makes you think you did do it? O: You showed me the paper. E: How do (did?) you know what the marks meant? O: You told me before what I was to do. . E: Think hard to see whether you can recall doing it? O: Can’t seem to think. (There was no Post-hypnotic Stage in this experiment as E proceeded at once to use Hyp. 2 as the first hypnotic stage of a new experiment.) Co tt tt SPLITTING THE MIND 83 Probative character of this experiment: O executes, according to a plan received, a task that involves gathering new information. Of all this he is in some way unaware. He afterwards correctly states the plan but cannot remember executing it. Had he remembered, it would not be of real importance, since E had shown O in the Interim Stage what O had done. The memory test thus, in part, fails and, in part, cannot be applied, because of the events in the Interim Stage. The main part of the proof, however, is not hereby invalidated. Associative relations among the several stages and subgroups: Hyp. 1 is associated in part with each group of Int., and is also associated with Hyp. 2. The hand-group is dissociated from (not “known” to) the voice-group to the extent at least of the meaning both of numbers read and of hand movements executed. For the reverse relation no evidence appears. The two groups are, apparently, not reunited in Hyp. 2. Comments: (1) The errors in execution to be found in the automatic writing do not invalidate the probative character of that writing. They were too close to the plan to be acceptably viewed as having merely a physiological meaning. (2) A strong impulse behind the dissociation of hand-group from voice-group seems to be indicated in the fact that calling attention to the hand or the number is not sufficient—contrary to what is usual in normal states—to make clear and vivid the peculiar meaning of either. EXPERIMENT V. April 30, 1920, 4:15 p.m. eG Bo H. Fiery B:! Rela Wwak, Hypnotic Stace 1: An interruption which took E outside the room for a few minutes after the induction of hypnosis left O longer than usual asleep without special suggestions intervening. This should be borne in mind in connection with O’s felt depth of sleep, as reported later. On returning to the room: E: What has been going on? O: There has been talking. (E had been in conversation just outside the door.) E: Is there any one else in the room? O: Yes (giving R’s name). Directions to O: I am going to give you a problem. You will add two numbers. The first is 682. When the second is given you will waken at once. You will remember nothing but will write the answer automatically. (Directions repeated: then) Do you understand? (Affirmative reply.) The second number is 947. 8+ CHARLES T. BURNETT INTERIM STAGE: O feels that he has been more deeply asleep than ever before; remembers nothing, and does not feel that there was anything to remember. He seats himself at the table, right hand behind screen, and begins writing at once, that hand becoming anaesthetic. E: What are you doing? O: I heard my hand writing. E: Close your eyes. (O does so; writing stops; anaesthesia remains.) E: Look at your right hand? (O does so; feeling is at once restored.) E then tries tests for suggestibility. O’s reactions are slow: he says: ; “T don’t want to do the things suggested.” Finally, with eyes open, he becomes fully docile to motor suggestions; and when E, pointing at O, says firmly: “You will go to sleep,” he falls at once into hypnosis and returns to the armchair. Meanwhile O’s hand had been writing 1629 (correct) about sixty times. The digits were usually clearly formed, and usually with a wider space between repetitions of the number than between the digits. 16229, 62, 1929, 16, 1626, 11629 each appeared once, involving, in these errors of doubling, omission, and substitution, each one of the four digits. Hypnotic STAGE 2: : E: What were you doing in the writing chair? O: Writing 1629 (correct). E: When did you solve it (the problem)? O: Before sitting down. E: Was it all finished before sitting down? O: Yes. E: Did you do it after you first woke up (ie., just after waking) ? O: Yes. E: What wakened you? O: The second number. E: (Determined, evidently, to have no doubt left on this point) Did you: do the problem before waking up? O: I don’t think so. E: What were you doing before sitting at the table? O: Talking—not solving the problem then. E: Were you awake or asleep when I suggested that you couldn’t raise your hand? O: Awake—I felt as usual. E: Why didn’t you do the things (referring to inhibitory suggestions) ? - O: I didn’t want to. E: Did you feel then as you do now? O: No. I had my eyes open. E: Could you open your eyes now and stay asleep? O: Yes. E: Were you then asleep even though your eyes were open? O: No, I don’t think so—until I sat in this chair. E: You will open your eyes but stay asleep. (O does so.) Do you see this letter in my hand? O: Yes. E: What is it? O: S—the first letter in sixteen-forty-two (1642). E: Why? O: Only thing it could be. (See introspection below.) E: Have you anything more to tell about the problem? O: No. E: When you waken you will remember what you have gone through. Post-HYPNOTIC STAGE: O is able to recall experiences of Hyp. 2. Then: E: (Referring to the writing chair) Do you remember what went on there? O: Yes (but he finds that he can’t recall). ; E: Try again. O: Writing 1629. E: Why? O: Because that was the answer to the problem given. E: When did you remember? (This obscurely phrased question seems to have referred to recalling the task to be done.) O: Before I sat down at the table. SPLITTING THE MIND 85 He recalls also what took place, says the record, “in last session,” mean- ing, presumably, in the next preceding experiment upon him in hypnosis, a day or two before—April 28. E: How do you feel when asked whether you are awake or asleep? O: I can’t tell—I don’t really think about it. E: Do you feel differently now from the way you felt when at the table? O: Yes (adding, in reply, probably, to a series of prodding questions), I notice myself and feel excited; but I did not, at the table. I feel breathless after hypnosis, but not generally (i.e., when hypnosis is not in question). I feel rather excited—an objectless excitement—the body excited but not the mind. I feel some discomfort. He recalls the S in E’s hand—the first letter of sixteen-forty-two. He had thought of 1629, which he had been writing, and 1642, a date, both beginning with S. Probative character of this experiment: O is able to produce intelligible writing according to a plan known otherwise to E, while engaged in intercourse with E and apparently unaware of the meaning of his right-hand movements. ‘ Apparently una- ware ” is the most that the evidence permits us to say; and this is inferred from the fact that, when asked “ What are you doing?” O replies merely, “I heard my hand writing.” He does not state specifically that he is aware of nothing else. The Dissocia- tion Test was thus not quite properly applied. Later, however, he recalls correctly what he was doing, without, meanwhile, having access to any source of information outside himself. Associative relations among the several stages and subgroups: Hyp. 1 is associated with (1.e., “known” to) the hand-group of {nt. but not with the voice-group. It is associated with Hyp. 2 and with Post-hyp. The voice-group of Int. is associated with Hyp. 2 and with Post-hyp. The hand group is associated with both Hyp. 2 and Post-hyp., and partly dissociated (meaning of the writing) from the voice-group; and the two groups are reunited in Hyp. 2. Hyp. 2 is by suggestion associated with Post-hyp. Comments: (1) The kinesthetic system of the writing hand is not dissociated from the voice-group. Even the touch system of the same hand can be drawn back by the aid of the visual func- tion. (2) The abnormal character of Int. is indicated by the high degree of suggestibility. (3) The perseveration in the writ- ing was independent of the form of the suggestion, so far as E 86 CHARLES T. BURNETT can discover, but O had seen similar results from another observer. (4) The problem-solving does not yield any evidence for co-con- sciousness. O thinks it was done in Int. and locates it very pre- cisely, as between rising from the armchair and sitting at the table. E’s questions were not sufficiently directed to this matter. So the nature of this highly interesting process is left in obscurity. (5) O interprets in Hyp. 2 his inhibitions in Int. as lack of desire. This is frequent enough as a delusion in hypnotic phenomena. (6) The cause for O’s selecting an S from sixteen-forty-two (1642) as a date is obscure. (7) Closing the eyes during the act of writing seems to lessen dissociated activity. (8) In Int., O feels less aware of his body than in Post-hyp. (9) Spontaneity in hypnosis is shown by the selection of a particular letter to be seen in the palm of E’s hand; but that choice is evidently closely related to an earlier number suggestion of E. SECTION 2. EXPERIMENTS A—C (This group of three experiments conforms to the Dissociation Test, but is defective in other tests of our canon. The probative value seems, however, to be high.) EXPERIMENT A. April 13, 1920. Probably about 3:30 p.m. Om) GHle Hi. Be eG eb Re je LAB. (This is the third experiment in hypnosis with this observer on this date.) Hypnotic Stace: O was asked whether there was any poetry which he could repeat from memory. He mentioned Coleridge’s Ancient Mariner, saying that he could repeat about fifteen verses (?) beginning at Part II. He was told that on awaking he was to write them out. Post-HYPNOTIC STAGE: (Corresponding to the Interim Stage of other experiments, except that, in this experiment, there was no second induction of hypnosis.) O responds negatively to tests of suggestibility. He does not remember the events of the preceding hypnosis. After O takes his seat at the table and grasps a pencil, put into his hand behind the screen, E begins: E: Does this suggest anything to you? O: No, but I guess I may have been told to write something. It is only a guess. E: Do you remember what you had for lunch? O answers correctly as verified by his fellow boarder, R. O is then given a copy of Aesop’s Fables and told to read aloud at a designated place. He reads about six pages, clearly and intelligently, laugh- ing at jokes. During this time his right hand has been producing the following confused and disjointed piece of writing—one of his worst. It begins with Part II of the Ancient Mariner, according to the suggestion, but skips about from point to point between Part II and Part I. The record does not show at just what juncture in the foregoing the writing began. The sun now . . . east (an error, corrected in next line) | right . . . cameheee|. . .|. . . (For the next two legible words he goes back three stanzas into Part Ly ClOrOss on ke hn TOHOW