The Birth of Psychometrics: Cambridge 1886 to 1889
It is a little known fact that psychometrics as a science began in
Anthropometrics at Cambridge 1885 - 1886
Before the arrival of Cattell, Galton had presented the Rede Lecture at Cambridge in June 1884 on the topic “The nature, principles and objects of the quantitative estimate of some of the less commonly and less easily measured of the human faculties”, and presented the University with several instruments similar to those he had used in his South Kensington Anthropometric Laboratory. John Venn (most well know for the ‘Venn diagram’), then Lecturer in Moral Science, Fellow of Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge, and Secretary of the Anthropological Institute of which Galton was President, endeavoured to carry out a study of Cambridge undergraduates using Galton’s techniques. He reported:
“Some difficulty was experienced at first in choosing a suitable room in which measurements could be carried out, as the University had but little available space, and unless some room could be found the position of which would bring the subject prominently under the notice of the students, no very extensive results could be hoped for. At first the Committee Room of the Union Society was put at our disposal, but this was not very long available, as some demur was made by the authorities there to the use of the room by undergraduates who were not members of the Society. After a time the library of the Philosophical Society, situated at the centre of the new museums and lecture rooms, was secured, and the measurements were taken there by Mr White, the Librarian of the Society.” (Venn, 1889)
The instruments used for this study measured keenness of eyesight, strength (of pull and squeeze), head size and shape, breathing capacity, height and weight. In addition, 'intellectual characteristics' were assessed by college tutors, who divided the students into groups as follows: 'first-class man', 'remaining honours men' and 'poll-men'. Venn’s conclusion from this study of 1,450 Cambridge students was that “there does not seem to be the slightest difference between one class of our students and another”. That is, first class mens' heads were no bigger than the heads of lesser mortals (physically at least), neither did they differ in their other physical attributes. These results anticipated those of Wissler’s famous New York study of Columbia students (Wissler, 1901) by more than 10 years.
Cattell's Psychometric Laboratory 1887 - 1889
While Venn was carrying out his anthropometric studies, James Ward, a Fellow of Trinity College (and later to become Professor of Moral Philosophy and Logic), had attempted to gain Senate approval for the establishment of a Psychology Laboratory at
“I have been busied this afternoon trying to find a place for a psychological laboratory. All the buildings are very crowded. Some of the colleges are rich but the university itself is poor, and finds it expensive to house laboratories and museums which have grown rapidly during the past few years. I expect, however, we will be able to get something. I dine with Mr Ward tomorrow to talk it over.”
Two days later, he had his laboratory.
“Yesterday I saw the Professor of Physics (J. J. Thompson, also a Fellow of
Thus, the world’s first laboratory devoted to psychometric study was established within the Cavendish Laboratory, one of the most significant buildings in the history of modern science
Much of the apparatus was Cattell’s own, designed for his PhD work and manufactured in
Cattell's return to America
In 1889, Cattell moved with his new English wife (Josephine Owen from London, who he had first met while in Leipzig) to a newly established Professorship in Psychophysics at the
Sir Francis Galton and James McKeen Cattell
Sir Francis Galton has often been described as ‘the father of psychometrics’, and as early as 1883 he had suggested that people of genius might also possess other psychological attributes such as unusually fine sensory discrimination. However, he appears to have been diverted from the point by other interests and have contended himself with the general impression without pursuing the matter in systematic investigation (Spearman, 1904). In 1890 Cattell published his seminal paper 'Mental Tests and Measurement', and over the next 10 years he was to apply these tests to a large number of individuals, believing this would enable "the scientific investigation of changes over time, inter-relatedness and variation under different circumstances" (Cattell, 1890). He also suggested that individuals would "find their tests interesting and useful in regard to training and mode of life".
In a footnote to Cattell's 1890 text, Galton commented rather dismissively:
"One of the most important objects of measurement is hardly if at all alluded to. The sort of estimate I have in view and which I would suggest should be something of this kind: 'mobile, eager, energetic; well shaped, successful at games requiring good eye and hand; sensitive; good at music and drawing' " (Cattell, 1890)
Cattell replied:
"It is convenient to follow Mr. Galton in combining tests of body, such as weight, size, colour of eyes, etc., with psychophysical and mental determinations ... (but) these latter alone are the subject of the present discussion." (Cattell, 1890).
Galton's conjecture was not finally refuted until the next century when Wissler (1901) published the definitive work on Cattell's accumulated data. It is noteworthy that the schism between those who, like Galton and his followers, were interested in the assessment of mental faculty from an anthropological and eugenicist point of view, and those who wished to assess mental function from an applied or experimental perspective was already present during these early days of psychometric endeavour.
Galton’s focus was neither psychology nor psychometrics. The driving force behind his work was always eugenics, his own protégé subject, and its experimental method of anthropometrics. It was to further this work that he caused to be set up the Department of Eugenics at University College London, endowing a Chair of Eugenics in that institution on his death. In fact, it is the discipline of statistics itself that was to be the main beneficiary of his endeavours; a statistics without which none of today’s measurement sciences of psychometrics, biometrical genetics, educational assessment, biometrics and econometrics would have been possible. The contribution of the Galton team to the building of statistics was enormous. Galton himself derived the standard deviation and regression; Karl Pearson, the first Professor of Eugenics, gave us the correlation coefficient, and Charles Spearman factor analysis. Between them they originated twin studies in human biometrics, and a later holder of the Galton Chair of Eugenics
References
Cattell, J. McK. (1886) Psychometrische Untersuchungen. Philosophische Studien, 3, 305-335; 452-492.
Cattell, J. McK. (1888) The Psychological Laboratory at
Cattell, J. McK. (1890) Mental Tests and Measurements. Mind, 15, 373-381.
Cattell, J. McK. (1928) Early Psychological Laboratories. Science, 67, No.1744, 543-548.
Galton, F. (1883) Inquiries into the human faculty and its development. Macmillan, London
Galton, F. (1887) On recent designs for anthropometric instruments. Journal of the Anthropological Institute, 16, 2-8.
Sokal, M. (1971) The unpublished autobiography of James McKeen Cattell. American Psychologist. July 1971, 26(7), 626-635.
Sokal, M. (1972) Psychology at Victorian Cambridge – the unofficial laboratory of 1887-1888. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 116, 145-147.
Sokal, M. (1981) An Education in Psychology: James McKeen Cattell's Journal and Letters from
Spearman, C. (1904) General Intelligence objectively determined and measured. American Journal of psychology, 15, 201-293.
Venn, J. (1889)
Wissler, C. (1901) The correlation of mental and physical tests.
© John Rust, August, 2008.