kinds of irregularities of development of which the teacher is bound to take account." A very interesting form of questionnaire investigation is that in which the compositions and drawings of children are compared and sifted for the purpose of discovering their interests and inclinations. This advantage is claimed for the methodthat by it the student is more likely to get at the spontaneous responses of the child than by other means. On this point, however, just as in studies by the usual form of the questionnaire, much depends upon the way in which the questions or the task of writing or drawing are presented to the respondents. Among those who have made contributions of material' gained by this method are Sophie Bryant (7)-who undertook her work at the suggestion of Francis Galton, and Professor Barnes (3)-the most productive of all. We have found that the questionnaire method probably had its rise in statistical science; that it was applied first to the collection of mere educational statistics; that Sigismund, in the second place, with a scientific motive, used it in determining the order of mental development in children; that in the hands of Darwin, Galton, and Fechner it has served the ends of Anthropology and of adult human Psychology, and that, finally, its application has been extended to the intricate problems of mental heredity and of Genetic Psychology in general; problems that are beyond the reach of the usual experimental methods. No scientific method has been perfected at a single bound. There is no editorial expression or contribution in those Journals which are looked upon as the especial media for the dissemination of the results of questionnaire studies, to indicate that even the most ardent supporters of the method consider it as an exception to the general rule. Only an impartial critical examination of the material and results of a number of representative contributions will suffice to discover its shortcomings and the full extent of its validity. Certain it. is that no other event since the appearance of the Psychophysik has so much quickened interest in the science of Psychology as the latest development of the method of the questionnaire. 2. BIBLIOGRAPHY. I. Allgemeine, deutsche Bibliothek. (See Dessoir, M. Geschichte der neuen deutschen Psychologie.) Berlin, 1902. p. 546. ANONYMOUS. The first Comprehensive Attempts at Child Study. U. S. Comm. of Educ. Report, 1901. Vol. 1, pp. 709-729. (Trans. from Berlin Stadtisches Jahrbuch, 1870.) 3. BARNES, EARL. Punishment as seen by Children. Ped. Sem., Oct., 1895, Vol. 3, pp. 235-245. 4. BARTHOLOMAI, F. Allgemeine Schul-zeitung, 1879, p. 327. 5. BARRETT, W. F. Psychical Research in America. Science, 2nd Ser., Vol. 4, p. 359. 6. BOLTON, F. E. Hydro-psychoses. Amer. Jour. of Psy., Jan. 1899, Vol. 10, pp. 169-227. 7. BRYANT, S. See Wiltse, S. E., History of Child Study, infra. 8. BURNHAM, W. H. Study of Adolescence. Ped. Sem., June, 1891 Vol. 1, pp. 174-195. 9. CARLYLE, F. Sartor Resartus. 10. II. 12. 13. Bk. 2, Chap. 2. (See Galton, F. English Men of Science, 1875, Preface.) DARWIN, C. Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals. DE CANDOLLE, A. Histoire des Sciences et des Savants depuis 14. FECHNER, G. T. Elemente d. Psychophysik. kopf, 1889, Vol. 2, pp. 477 ff. Leipzig, Breit 15. GALTON, F. English Men of Science. London, Macmillan Co., 1874, 270 pp. See pref. and apx. 16. 17. Remarks on Replies by Teachers to Questions Respecting Mental Fatigue. Jour. Anthrop. Inst., 1889, Vol. 18, pp. 157-167. Inquiries into Human Faculty. London, Macmillan Co., 1883. See pp. 83 ff.; also Apx. F. 18. GREENWOOD, J. M. What Children Know. Proc. Nat. Educ. Assoc., 1884, pp. 195-198. 19. GUILLET, C. Recapitulation and Education. Ped. Sem., Oct., 1900, Vol. 7, pp. 397-445. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. HALL, G. S. Contents of Children's Minds on Entering School. A Study of Fears. Amer. Jour. of Psy., Jan., 1897, Moral and Religious Training of Children and Adolescents. Ped. Sem., June, 1891, Vol. 1, pp. 196-210. Editorial. Ped. Sem., Dec., 1893, Vol. 2, pp. 335-342. Editorial. Ped. Sem., Oct., 1894, Vol. 3, pp. 3-7. Editorial. Ped. Sem., Mar., 1901, Vol. 8, pp. 1-2. 26. HARTMANN, B. Die Analyse des kindlichen Gedankenkreises Annaberg, 1890. See especially p. 49. 27. HELVETIUS. See Galton, F. English Men of Science. Preface. 28. HENRY, C. Le Contraste, le rythme, la mesure. Rev. Philos., Oct., 1889, Vol. 28, pp. 356-381. 29. HERICOURT, J. Project d. Questionnaire Psycho-physique. Rev. Philos., 1890, Vol. 29, pp. 445-448. 30. Journal of the Statistical Society. London Report, Vol. 1, pp. 5 and 86. 31. Journal of the Statistical Society. London, Vol. 4, pp. 85, 156, 212. 32. LACASSAGNE, M. Questionnaire de Psycho-physiologie. Rev. Scient., 1892, Vol. 49, PP. 797-798. 33. LANGE, K. Allgemeine Schulzeitung, 1879, p. 327. 34. LEUBA, J. H. Study in the Psychology of Religious Phenomena. Amer. Jour. of Psy., April, 1896, Vol. 7, pp. 309-385. 35. PODMORE, F. Apparitions and Thought Transference. N. Y., Scribner & Sons, 1895. See pp. 5 ff. 36. Proceedings of the Society for Psychical Research. 1882-1883, Vol. 1, pp. 4, 297 and 300. 37. QUANTZ, J. O. Dendro-psychoses. Amer. Jour. of Psy., July, 1898, Vol. 9, pp. 449-506. 38. QUETELET. Account of his Work. Zeitsch. f. Philos. u. Philosoph. Kritik, 1876, No. 2, by Dr. Rehnisch. (Reviewed in Rev. Philos., Vol. 2, p. 428.) 39. RIBOT, T. Sur la Valeur des Questionnaires en Psychologie. Jour. de Psy., Normale et Pathologique, 1904, Vol. 1, pp. 1-10. 41. SIGISMUND, B. Kind und Welt. Bruo, F., Vieweg, 1856. See Introduction, pp. 10 and 39. 42. STARBUCK, E. D. Psychology of Religion. N. Y., Scribner's Sons, 1899. 43. Statistical Bureau of Berlin. See Prof. Hirschberg's Stadtisches Jahrbuch d. Stadt Berlin, 27 Jahrgang, 1900-1902, Introduction. 44. STOY. See Hartmann, B. Analyse, etc. 45. TIEDEMAN, J. Record of Infant Life. Tr. by Soldan, Syracuse, Bardeen, 1890. See also Dessoir, M. Geschichte der neuen deutschen Psychologie, 1902, p. 546. 46. WAGNER. Die Gesetzmässigkeit in den scheinbar willkürlichen menschlichen Handlungen vom Standpunkte d. Statistik. Hamburg, 1864. See also Zeitsch. f. Philos. u. Philos. Kritik, 1876, No. 2. 47. WILLMANN, O. Pädagogische Vorträge über die Hebung die geistigen Thätigkeit durch den Untericht. Leipzig, Gräbner, 1869. (See Anonymous above.) 48. WILTSE, S. E. Preliminary Sketch of the History of Child Study in Amèrica. Ped. Sem., Oct., 1895, Vol. 3. See especially p. 192; also Amer. Jour. of Psy., Jan., 1890, Vol. 3, pp. 59-70. A STUDY OF DOLLS AMONG POLISH CHILDREN. By MADAM ANNA GRUDZINSKA. Edited by Theodate L. Smith, Ph. D. Doll play may be compared with drawing: both teach the child and help develop his mind, eye, and heart. Drawing teaches the child to see and observe; dolls teach him to love, appreciate and take care of others. In the study of doll play the careful mother and educator may find a fertile field for the observation of children's minds, ways, wants and wishes. Several well known psychologists and students of childhood, e. g., G. Stanley Hall, Sully, Queyrat and Paola Lombroso, have turned their attention to doll play and have published valuable studies. In this study, I have made use of a part of the questionnaire upon which the Study of Dolls by G. Stanley Hall and A. Caswell Ellis, published in 1896, was based. Doll play is one of the oldest forms of child play and is known to have existed in antiquity. The early sarcophagi of the Egyptians, the catacombs of the Christians, the exhumed houses of Herculaneum and Pompeii and the ancient graves of Rome and Athens have preserved not only the bodies of children but also their dolls. For the present study the following questionnaire was used: I. Do you like dolls? Do you play with them? Does your doll have a name? Is she good? Do you punish her? How? Is your doll ill sometimes? Do you cure her yourself? What illnesses does she have? 2. Do you sew for your dolls? Do you wash for her? Do you bathe, comb and wash her? How many gowns and hats has your doll? Has she underclothes? Who made these? 3. What does your doll eat? Do you put your doll to bed, cover her up and have her say her prayers? Do you take her out or leave her at home while you are riding, visiting, taking a walk, etc.? 4. Do you prefer fair or dark haired dolls; china dolls or stuffed dolls; large or small dolls; pale or rosy dolls; moving, walking or speaking dolls? Do you like heirloom dolls? 5. Did you ever play with paper, rag, or stick dolls? 6. Is your doll alive? Can she hear and understand? Does she understand that you are angry with or good to her? 7. Do you grieve if your doll is spoiled? Can another take her place? 8. Do you like dolls more or less now than when you were younger? Do you like to have others play with your doll? Name all your different plays with your doll. 9. What do you do with your old and broken dolls? Why do you not continue your doll play? To this questionnaire 182 answers were received from Warsaw, Kiev, Posen, Kalisch and country districts in various parts of Poland. None of these are from peasant children, though some are from very poor children in the elementary schools in Kalisch, near Warsaw. These children have never owned a bought doll, though they know about and appreciate the luxury of one. Their dolls are made with their own hands, and those who had baby sisters did not seem to care for anything additional in the form of a doll. Few have ever seen any but home-made dolls, and the doll play ceases by the age of ten, not, however, because of the dying out of the inclination, but from the pressure of circumstances, as the following answers show: "I cannot play with my doll, mother does not allow it." "Mother does not wish me to play with a doll. She says I am too old and ought to help her." Yet these and similar answers came from children of nine to eleven years old. The age distribution of the 182 answers is as follows: The number of answers to each question and percentages are here tabulated: Table showing number and per cent. of children answering each question. Answers were received from but two boys (10 and 11 yrs.), of whom one attended the Real and the other the Classical gymnasium. Both of these were very fond of their dolls, named them and played with them. They did this secretly, |