動物學習に於ける頻度の法則の優位性について

Abstract

IThe primary quality, or the superiority of The Law of Frequency early, advocated. by Prof. Thorndike might be considered as a problem of first importance in the field of animal lerning. It is clear that this Law of Frequency forms a most essential and therefore most important part of his theory; in regard to its being of a primary quality, many doubts have been raised hithertofore, which tendency ever more encouraged by Prof, Kohler's. investigation on apes. How such a problem will find solution hardly fails to stir a most vital interest in us all connected with the study of learning. It was my intention to undergo several experimental observations upon this problem and try to catch facts as clearly as possible.IIWith this view, I tried three experiments. In the first experiment, I provided a maze-box having two equidistant courses to a. goal, as illustrated in fig. A, and using a chick as subject, I observed what “gstart” of behaviour it would form. In the second experiment, I used a maze box with two courses of unequal distance to the goal, as fig. B shows, and I observed the formation of the behaviour of a chick in it. As the third step, having habituated the behaviour of a chick in a maze-box with one course only, as shown in fig. C, I put it in a maze-box where one course is nearer to the goal than the other, as fig. B shows, and then observed how it would form its behaviour.IIITo summarize the results of these experiments; in the first experiment, because the behaviour of the chickens were controled by the infiuence of the previous experience, it can be said that the influence of one “gestalt” of behaviour, strengthened by repetition, was responsible to the final formation of their “gestalt” of behaviour. In this point, Prof. Thorndike's Law of Frequency can be said to perform literally the part of primary function in animal learning.In the second experiment, however, it was observed that the taking of the course nearer to the goal, rather than that which the chick had most frequented, often determined the final formation of the “gestalt” of behaviour. In this instance, it would that the Law of Frequency can perform only a secondary function.In the third experiment, I obsefrved that the course which was taken absolutely frequently in the first part, was abandoned, and in its stead the behaviour of taking the course nearer to the goal was finally acquired. As the result of this experiment, we must recognize the existence of some other factor which is more influential than the Law of Frequency, in deciding the animal's “gestalt” of behaviour. This other factor is namely the approximation to the object, that is, “Zweckzusammenhang”.IVThus we can assert that we should oppose to the primarity of the Law of Frequency and recognize, in its stead, the supreme factor of “Zweckzusammenhang” as the primary and fundamental principle of animal learning. This primarity of “Zweckzusammenhang” is neither a supplementary law to the Law of Frequency as Prof. Watson's Law of Recency, nor a supplementary law as Prof. Thorndike's Law of Effect. It is based on the object consciousness of an animal, too naive and indefinite to be called one, and in this, according to my belief can be witnessed the spontaneity of animal behaviour.