Allen Esterson wrote with regard to the celebrated nag Clever Hans: > It is evident that the Commission failed to use a blind test of the claims > (a procedure known since the beginning of the nineteenth century), so > their examination of the horse's abilities can hardly be described as > scientific.
Oskar Pfungst's brilliant elucidation of the true nature of Clever Hans' abilities notwithstanding, I've always been intrigued by a statement in Nicholas Wade's (1980)_ article on the animal language wars (which makes "the War of the Roses look like a teddy-bears' picnic"). Wade was reporting, facetiously, on a conference organized by the linguist Thomas Sebeok for the New York Academy of Sciences. According to Wade: "As noted by Sebeok [probably in his book _Speaking of Apes_--sb], Clever Hans had a French imitator called Clever Bertrand. Clever Bertrand could do everything that Clever Hans could do. There was only one difference between the two horses: Clever Bertrand was totally blind." This is undoubtedly the first literally true blind study, and seems to rule out the Clever Hans effect. So how did Clever Bertrand do it? Stephen Wade, N. (1980). Does Man Alone Have Language? Apes Reply in Riddles, and a Horse Says Neigh. _Science_, 208. 1349-- [wonderful title, eh?] ----------------------------------------------------------------- Stephen L. Black, Ph.D. Professor of Psychology, Emeritus Bishop's University e-mail: [email protected] 2600 College St. Sherbrooke QC J1M 1Z7 Canada Subscribe to discussion list (TIPS) for the teaching of psychology at http://flightline.highline.edu/sfrantz/tips/ ----------------------------------------------------------------------- --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly ([email protected])
