The Analytical Diagnosis
The Psychological Clinic Copyright, 1922, by Lightner Witmer, Editor. Vol. XIV, Nos. 5-6 October, November, 1922 By Lightner Witmer, Ph.D.
Psychology is a science of behavior. It is derived from the observation of one particularized performance after another. Let “B ” represent the behavior of a lifetime, a day, an hour, or a moment, and P, P’, P” the sequence of performances observed; then B = P+P’+P”+ (1)
A particular performance is defined by a beginning, a number of discriminated components, and an end. “A child walks upstairs”? this performance begins with the first step up and ends at the top of the staircase. If the performance is oriented as nothing but one step up after another, each step like every other step, the total performance is composed of the repetition of one and the same performance, i. e., it is an operation. “To do the eleven-block formboard,, is an operation of eleven repeated elements, if the adjustment of each block is considered equal to the adjustment of any other block. In reality, however, each block differs from every other block; some are easy to hold and adjust?others difficult; some are easy to discriminate?others difficult. To adjust one block is itself a complex performance made up of constants and variables. To solve a mathematical problem is a complex performance involving the four elementary operations of arithmetic and many other operations.
The operation is the analytic element of performance, a constant which may be repeated, but which, by definition, varies only quantitatively. The goal of scientific analysis is the differentiation of elementary, i. e., not further analyzable operations; theoretically, every P = xO+yO’+zO”+ (2) in which performance 0, 0’, O” are qualitatively discriminated operations, and x, y and z are differentiated quantities. Even when performances are known to be complex, they are often treated as quasi-operations; thus, we speak of the operation of a machine (an ideally simple operation), and also of the operations of an army or the human intellect?performances which differ exceedingly in complexity. Adding up a column of figures approaches more nearly the ideal operation of analytic discrimination than writing a composition, but both may be regarded as operations or as complex performances, depending on our point of view. All the behavior of a lifetime may be considered as an operation, i. e., a sequence of adaptations to environment.
The outcome of a performance brings something into existence that did not exist before. This “something” is a product. A performance is usually defined by its product. The classification of performances, therefore, will be a classification of products. We judge a tree by its fruits, and we assume competency from the products of an operation. We affirm the existence of an ability whenever we see a particular operation eventuating in the production of some differentiated pattern of behavior. The performance, viz., the operation, is a sequence of observed events?it is an observed fact, but the ability is an idea?as a cause, it is potential energy The operation is a form of motion producing an effect; it is a mechanism, a means to an end. The affirmation of the existence of an ability is only a promise of future performance. The diagnosis of an ability is a prognosis of future production under given conditions. Just as performances are analyzed into components called “operations,” so an ability may be analyzed into cooperating abilities, a different ability for each qualitatively differentiated product.
Competency is an aggregate of abilities. Thus, reading competency is the aggregate of all the abilities necessary in order to read. The use of the word “competency” suggests that reading is the product or effect of many different operations, and that each differentiated operation implies a differentiated ability. Talking and reading seem to be equally simple productions, but the ability to read is a more complex competency than the ability to talk. At one time it may serve our purpose to regard a particular product as an effect of the operation of a single ability; at another time it may serve our purpose better to emphasize its complex character. In general, a competency is the ability to bring into existence some qualitatively differentiated product. Every competency, no matter how apparently simple, is theoretically analyzable into cooperating abilities. Every
C = A+A’+A”+ (3) or C = No A’s (4)
Such statements, as “Man has more ability than any other species of animal,” or, “Shakespeare is a greater poet than LongTHE ANALYTICAL DIAGNOSIS. 131 fellow,” are diagnostic estimates based partly on opinion and partly on observed production* As an opinion, the diagnosis is what I call (for reasons which I cannot enter into now) a “critical diagnosis.” As an estimation of observed production, it is “an impressionistic diagnosis.” To say that man has more ability than any other species of animal really means that human operations produce more of value to human beings than the operations of the lower animals. To say that “Shakespeare is a greater poet than Longfellow” means that Shakespeare’s products are preferred, by me and other critics, to those of Longfellow. The critico-impressionistic diagnosis is an expression of preference. It implies relative value or importance; it displays appreciation or prejudice. It enters into every statement of relative competency; it is an integral part of every diagnosis.
Let Cj represent the competency of one man and C2 the competency of another, and let us suppose that Cx>C2 (5) then ViAj-f V,1A,1+V’,1A”1+ >V2A2+V’2A’2+V’,2A’,S+ or, V1XN0. Ax’s >V?xNo. A2’s or, ViCx >V2C2 (6) In other words No. 5, the formula of comparative competency, is an elliptical form of No. 6. If the critico-impressionistic diagnosis is disputed, i. e., if it is denied that ViCi>V2C2, then productions must be measured, analyzed and valued, and, to do this, a standard unit of time must be introduced into the formula. This standard unit of time may be the lifetime of those whose competency is rated or it may be a smaller unit of time, for example, the time required to pass a test. Competency is only a promise of future performance, but proficiency is a rank order, i. e., a rating determined by the measurement of what has been produced during the passage of a standard measure of time; in other words,
Proficiency = Rank Order X ^ro^uc^on Time Proficiency, therefore, is relative productivity, measured by the estimated value of a number of qualitatively differentiated products, and by the time required to produce them.
Proficiency=VXPX^+V’XP’X^+V”XP”X^+ (7) As every qualitatively differentiated product is assumed to be a consequence of the operation of a number of differentiated abilities, No P’s Proficiency = VxNo. A’sX?^?11 (8)
The result of a test, even though it be a battery of tests, is scored in a number of products. This score, divided by time, measures the performer’s productivity, or efficiency. If the perfonnance is an operation, and all the products scored are the products of one and the same ability, then the “No. A’s” in the formula above equals 1, and the value of the products will vary directly with their number; in other words, No P’s Proficiency = R. O.X???- =R. O.XEfficiency (9) This assumption underlies nearly every test; for example, the Binet Intelligence Test assumes that intelligence alone produced the score of products, and that eveiy unit product in the total number No Ps of products has the same value. The formula: ?^?, is the formula of Efficiency. In other words, proficiency is the relative efficiencjr with which an ability operates, and a rank order of efficiency is taken to be the rank order of ability. Those who produce the most goods with the Binet Test have the most intelligence?according to the Binet testers.
While a similar assumption underlies most tests, the assumption is more often false than true, for the proficiency of performance varies more often with the number of abilities employed in production than with the efficiency of a particular operation. Nor must the value of the diverse component products constituting the total production be overlooked, as is so often done. We must always bear in mind that Proficiency = VXCXE (10) Every test really results in a complex product made up of component products. It is important to know how many of these test products can be produced in a given unit of time, or, in other words, how much efficiency is developed by those tested, but it is equally important, if possible, to ascertain, by observation and analysis, how many abilities cooperated in their production, and the relative value, weight or importance of each ability contributing to the total product.
The demonstrable diagnosis is a proficiency rating, which resolves itself theoretically into the measurement of efficiency, and a list of the analytically discriminated abilities, with an estimate of the relative value of each ability. This citation and estimate of abilities, I call the “analytical diagnosis.” It is, in fact, an analytico-criticoimpressionistic diagnosis. It is based on observation and measurement, but it is not a measurement. Exact measurement is a good thing in its place, but any fool may use a tape to give specious exactitude to his opinions. This was the regular practice of the phrenologists, and psychological charlatans will continue to flourish their tapes and batteries of tests. Science develops partly by measurement, but largely by analytical discrimination and the exercise of good judgment, which is opinion refined by experience. This the Binet testers forget when they blindfold themselves and jump from an artificial performance score, good enough for some uses, to what they call a “Mental Age” and an “Intelligence Quotient.” Strictly speaking, then, the measured quantity dealt with as a result of tests is a measure of proficiency, i. e., the number of products produced in a unit of time by a number of operations. The more nearly this really composite operation approximates analytic simplicity, the more nearly does proficiency equal efficiency. It is relatively easy to measure a child’s ability to add, but it is more difficult to measure his ability to write a composition. Nevertheless, even complex performances are measureable, and the competency of one man may be diagnosed as “more” than the competency of another. In so far as the diagnosis depends on exact measurement, it is a demonstrable diagnosis; in so far as it depends on analysis and valuation, it is an analytical diagnosis.
Every performance, then, is the product of an operating competency. “How many abilities were concerned?” This question requires us to consider the number of abilities into which the competency is to be analyzed. We may specify too many, or too few. Over specification is cumbersome and over generalization is unenlightening. Biology assumes that self-preservation and reproduction are the two general abilities of organic life?two are not enough for psychological diagnosis. The Binet tester, talking about Mental Age at one moment and intelligence at another, assumes that mentality is the same thing as intelligence, and that all behavior is the product of a single ability. Common sense and the purpose in hand determine how many categories it will be desirable to employ for the purpose of analytical diagnosis.
I discriminate six general competencies, or, in other words, six universal categories of behavior. They are: 1. Operation = Mechanism ? Body 2. Conformity = Determination = Will 3. Particularization = Mind 4. Organization = Development = Intellect 5. Origination = Intelligence 6. Orientation = Motivation=Soul 134 THE PSYCHOLOGICAL CLINIC. Every performance is, as it were, a die, to be viewed from six different points of view, if the performance is to be adequately known as the complex-unit it really is. The six categories are to be defined by contrasting each with the other five in turn. In this way, thirty different categories of behavior are developed. They are:
1. Operation 1. Ability 1. Direction (Ac) 1. Control I. Initiative 1. Energy (V) Power Motivation 2. Efficiency 2. Conformitt 2. Differentiation 2. Trainability 2. Intelligence 2. Appreciation Balance 3. Productivity (Sp) 3. Uniformity 3. Particularization 3. Comprehension 3. Exploration 3. Concernment Interest i. Order 4. Conformability 4. Discrimination 4. Organization 4. Originality 4. Conversion Convertibility 5. Effort 5. Achievement 5. Persistence 5. Imagination 5. Origination 5. Aspiration Ambition 6. Endurance 6. Judgment 6. Discernment 6. Culture 6. Confidence 6. Orientation Force Alertness Educability
Satisfaction
If psychology is a science of behavior and the unit of observation is a performance, and every performance may be analyzed into the operations of qualitatively discriminated abilities, then psychology may also be defined as the science of competency. The thirty categories of behavior are the outline of a psychology of competency. These categories have also demonstrated their value for analytical diagnosis at the Psychological Clinic of the University of Pennsylvania. “The Analytical Diagnosis”1 Chart in use at the Psychological Clinic contains the twenty-four items of the former schedule and a few more. In fact, this new “Analytical Diagnosis” chart comprises a total of fifty-six items?too many, perhaps, for a perspicuous psychograph. I think the items cover the range of abilities into which human competency may be satisfactorily analyzed. The number may be cut down in practice to suit the convenience of the diagnostician.
1 Humptstone, Henry Judson, Ph.D., “The Analytical Diagnosis.” The Psychological Clinio, Vol. XII, Nos. 5-9, May, 19l9, pp. 171-174. THE ANALYTICAL DIAGNOSIS. 135 THE ANALYTIC DIAGNOSIS Name: Race: Born: Age: Culture L: 1 2 3 4 5 Basis of estimate: 1. Proficiency M’s: (See Mental Exam. Blank) Social (B) I. Q. School P. L. 2. Competency 2 Spec. A’s: (?) Ability a (?) Efficiency b Spec. D’s: 3. Speed 3 11. Differentiation (R) 11 (a) Productivity a Sensib. V. A. K. P. G. Moral; ^Esthetic 4. Accuracy: 4 12. Consistency: 12 (o) Directions a (a) Reliability a 5. Coordination 5 13. A. D. (A. C. A.) 13 (?) Cooperation a (a) Distribution a (?) Planfulness b 6. Control 6 14. Complexity (R) 14 (c) Motivation (d) Personality (o) Comprehension (6) I. S. (c) Organizability 7. Effort 7 15. Pers. (P. C. A.)-D ? ? 15 8. Initiative ? ? 8 16. Exploration (No) 16 9. Pertinacity .. - 9 17. Discernment L. 17 (a) Endurance ? ? a (a) Alertness a (6) Strength (c) Health ? .. ? ? ? c 10. Energy, V. .. .. ? ? .. 10 18. Interest (No) (a) Excitability a (o) Zest (b) Vivacity 19. Trainability 19 (?) Retention a (?) Capacity b 20. Conformability 20 (a) Imitativeness a 21. Imageability 21 22. Originality .. 22 23. Educability 23 (a) Intellect ? 24. Convertibility 24 (a) Susceptibility .. ? ? 25. Intelligence 25 26. Achievement L. 26 27. Confidence 27 28. Ambition .. 28 29. Balance 29 (a) Soc. Orientation a 30. Judgment 30
Disclaimer
The historical material in this project falls into one of three categories for clearances and permissions:
Material currently under copyright, made available with a Creative Commons license chosen by the publisher.
Material that is in the public domain
Material identified by the Welcome Trust as an Orphan Work, made available with a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
While we are in the process of adding metadata to the articles, please check the article at its original source for specific copyrights.