" | 461—­470 | 5 | 7 | 1 | 6 | 4 | 8 | 2 | 5 | 3 | 9 |10 | 0 |24 | 6 | 1:0.25 19 | 471—­480 | 5 | 7 | 1 | 6 | 8.4 | 8 | 2 | 5 | 3 | 9 | 9 | 1 | 9 | 1 | 1:0.11 --------+-----------+--------------+--------------+---------
-----+--------------+--------------+--------------+--------------+--------------+--------------+--------------+---+---+---+---+-------- | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 5.6 | 5.6 | 4.5.6.7.8.9 | 4.5.6.7.8.9 | 1.2.3.4.5 | 1.2.3.4.5 | 2.3.4.5.6.7 | 2.3.4.5.6.7 | 3.4.5.6.7.8 | 3.4.5.6.7.8 | | | | | | +--------------+--------------+--------------+--
------------+--------------+--------------+--------------+--------------+--------------+--------------+---+---+---+---+-------- 19 | 1—­10 | 5 | 6 | 4 | 9 | 1 | 5 | 3.7.2 | 7 | 3 | 8 | 9 | 1 | 9 | 1 | 1:0.11 ========+===========+==============+==============+=========
=====+==============+==============+==============+==============+==============+==============+==============+===+===+===+===+========

[Footnote *:  Aided by experimenter.]

The data of table 6 indicate for this problem only three pronounced reactive tendencies:  (a) As the initial tendency, the choice of the second box from the right end.  This proved surprisingly weak, in view of the animal’s long training on problem 2, and it disappeared quickly. (b) Choice of the end boxes, and (c) direct choice of the right box.

For this, as for the other problems, extreme differences in method and in time and degree of success appear for the different settings.  Thus, while settings 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, and 10 proved to be easy, settings 4, 5, 8, and 9 were evidently more difficult.

[Illustration:  FIGURE 20.—­Error curve of learning for the solution of problem 3 (alternately the first box at the left end and the first at the right end) by Sobke.]

From the first this problem promised to be much easier for Sobke than problem 2, and although the actual number of trials necessary for the solution is greater by sixty for problem 3 than for problem 2, comparison of the data of the tables justifies the statement that the third problem was both easier and more nearly adequately solved than the second.  This is not surprising when the nature of the two problems is considered, for whereas problem 2 requires choice by perception of the relationship of secondness from the right end of the group, problem 3 requires, instead, the choice of the end member of the group each time, with the additional variation of alternation of ends.  Now as it happens, the end member is easily selected by the monkey, and it appears further that alternation was relatively easy for Sobke to acquire.  Consequently, the combination of end and alternation proved easier than the choice of the second from the right end of the group.