ion can be compared with these intermingled,
quantitatively determined groups of letters.

If I consider the general results of these experiments only with
reference to the time-measurement, I should say that a person who
completes the distribution of the cards in less than 80 seconds is
quick in his decisions; from 80 to 150, moderately quick; from 150 to
250, slow and deliberate and rather too deliberate for situations
which demand quick action; over 250 seconds, he would belong among
those wavering persons who hesitate too long in a life situation which
demands decision. The time which is needed for the mere distribution
of the cards themselves plays a very small role compared with the time
of the whole process, and can be neglected. In order to determine
this, I asked all the subjects before they made the real experiment to
distribute 24 other cards in 4 piles, on each of which one of the four
letters, A, E, O, and U was printed only once. Hence no comparison of
various factors was involved in this form of distribution. The average
time for this ordinary sorting was about 20 seconds. Only rather quick
individuals carried it out in less than 18 and only very slow ones
needed more than 25 seconds. This maximum variation of 10 seconds is
evidently insignificant, as the variations in the experiment amount to
more than 200 seconds. But it is very characteristic that the results
of the two experiments do not move parallel. Some persons, who are
able to sort the cards on which only one of the 4 letters is printed
very quickly, are rather slow when they sort the cards with the 48
letters for which the essential factor is the act of comparison. In
the first case the training in card-playing also seems to have a
certain influence, but in the second case, our real experiment on
decision, this influence does not seem to exist.

We have emphasized from the start that it is no less important to give
consideration to the number of mistakes. A mere rapidity of
distribution with many mistakes characterizes, as we saw, a mental
system which is just as unfit for practical purposes as one which acts
with too great slowness. But it would not have been sufficient simply
to ask how many cards were put into wrong piles. The special
arrangement of the cards with four different types of combinations was
introduced for the purpose of discriminating among mistakes of unequal
seriousness. When one letter appeared 21 times and the three others