Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

703) articles on growth and disease, 1915 and 1916; and Strong's (795) study of the effect of hookworm, 1916. Many general texts on children's diseases contain chapters on growth. Among those not previously mentioned is that by Feer (250) 1911. Kötz (450) 1918-19, discussed the phenomena of unequal growth of the two sides of the body, and Thoma (814) 1918, the conditions that interfere with the growth of the head.

B. MENTAL ABNORMALITY

From the standpoint of developing standards for the physical growth of normal boys and girls, valuable facts have been obtained through comparison with the growth of feeble-minded children. The first study dealing with the physical growth of idiots and imbeciles (mentally deficient children) was published by Roberts (663) in the manual on Anthropometry, in 1878. The investigation, which was probably made in 1871, included the height and weight of 829 children and adults between the ages of three and 15 years, from the asylums in England, without differentiating between the sexes. In 1877 Shuttleworth (752) published in America a very good paper on the growth and mentality of feebleminded children. Tarbell's (801 and 802) studies appeared in England, 1876-86 and 1888-89. Wylie (897 and 898) 1899 to 1903, made careful studies of 400 boys and girls from Minnesota and concluded that feebleminded children were subnormal in physical development, while Macdonald (490) 1897-98, also found children with abnormalities inferior in growth to children in general. Binet's (68-71) significant studies appeared in France in 1900 to 1910. A later book with Simon (72) was translated, 1914. Simon's (761 and 762) studies appeared 1899 and 1900; Vaney's (833 and 834) 1906-1909, and Martin's (504) in 1912. Norsworthy (553) 1906, could find no distinguishable differences between the physical development of feebleminded and normal children compared with the Boas and Bowditch standards. Guttmann (333) reported comparative measurements of normal and abnormal children in 1906. Goddard (297) 1912, has made the most valuable and painstaking study within this field, having recorded measurements on 10,000 children at the Vineland Training School in New Jersey and at eighteen other institutions in America. Doll (212) 1916, used the psychophysical measurements of right and left grip and lung capacity as diagnostic criteria of feeblemindedness, and Porteus (619) 1919-20,

has been making careful studies in cephalometry of the feebleminded children at Vineland.

Among the special studies of physical development of the insane, should be mentioned Boyd's (114) 1861, studies on 2614 postmortem examinations. Goodall (308 and 309) 1898 and 1901, compared the development of the insane and the abnormal. The physical development of delinquents has not received much attention, though several medical studies have been made. The best work in the anthropometric field is that by Marty (506) 1898, and by Tallant (800) 1912.

9. PHYSIOLOGICAL AGE

A. ADOLESCENT GROWTH

One of the most important present-day problems in physical growth from the standpoint of the educational, social, religious and psychological development of the child centers around the question of physiological age, with particular reference to the development during adolescence. In his early work, 1890, Key, (432) raised the problem of "Die Pubertätsentwicklung and das Verhältnis derselben zu den Krankheitsercheinungen der Schuljugend." In 1891 Key (433) made another contribution to the subject, as did Miwa (529) 1893. Morey-Errant (538) 1898, published a general discussion bearing primarily on puberty; Lincoln (477) 1896, published a practical paper with some good observations on sexual maturity; Moon (536) 1899, printed a short paper with a discussion of the question of growth and puberty, claiming that the latter had no effect on growth; Godin (298, 301, 302) in 1902, 1911 and 1912, published brief papers on the adolescent type, based on his 1903 study (299), with 36,000 measurements on the same one hundred subjects followed from 13 to 18 years of age. In 1902 and 1967 Wiazemsky (877 and 878) published important studies on modifications of the organism during the period of puberty. Kimpflin (436) 1914, reported measurements of 200 adolescents. Riebesell (655) 1916, proposed that weight as a function of time should be used as an index of physiological age.

B. PHYSIOLOGICAL AGE AND SCHOOL PROGRESS

The educational and sociological significance of the problem of physiological age has been championed by Bryan (132) 1900; Crampton (181-184) 1908; Weissenberg (865) 1911; Foster (261)

1910-11; Boas (98) 1912; Beik (46) 1913, and Baldwin (27 and 28) 1914 and 1916. Bean (42) 1914, reported on the relation between dentition and maturity, while Rotch (675 and 676) 910, initiated the problem of the graduations of carpal and epiphyseal development. The question of adolescence in its psychological, sociological and educational bearings, together with comparative data from various investigations on physical development, has been treated by Hall (340) in his Adolescence, 1904.

10. PHYSICAL GROWTH AND MENTAL DEVELOPMENT

A most significant trend of investigations on physical growth, from the writer's point of view, lies in the large number of studies dealing with the relationship between physical and mental development. Modern genetic, functional and behavioristic psychology all begin with the phenomena of physical growth. Warner's (855) 1890, very comprehensive but inaccurate study, served to initiate the problem in England. Other studies which contain material bearing on this problem, but usually not analyzed to show the exact relation between physical and mental development, have been made by Martiegka (502) 1898; Thorne (819) 1904; Berry (58) 1904; Quirsfeld (635-637) 1904-1907; Samosch (687) 1904; Eyerbibh and Löwenfeld (243) 1905; Popper (610) 1907; Arkle (15) 1908; Vaney (833-834) 1906 to 1909; and Albert and Arvizu (3) 1917. Burk (136) 1898, Oppenheim (563) 1898, Hall (340) 1904, Thorndike (817) 1901, Whipple (874) 1915, and Kirkpatrick (440) 1917, analyzed and summarized the general problem more or less extensively without original data.

A. ABSENCE OF CORRELATION

A number of investigations have shown no discernible relationship between mental and physical development. So, for example, Galton (287) 1891, in university tests found no correlation between literary ability and physical measurements. Gilbert (294 and 295) 1895 and 1897, and Cattell and Farrand (163) 1896, found no definite correlation between physical and mental tests. Radosavljevich (639) 1913, also could trace but little correlation between physical development and school brightness. The work of Pearson (577-579) 1901-02, and 1906, and of Lee, Lewenz and Pearson (469) 1903-04, showed very small and unreliable correlations between intelligence and physical characters.

B. NEGATIVE CORRELATIONS

Only one investigator definitely states a negative correlation. This is Sargent (693) 1908, who found that the "stipend scholarship men" at Harvard were among the shortest and lightest.

C. POSITIVE CORRELATIONS

The most significant pioneer study showing positive correlation was made by Porter (611-618) 1892-93, 1894 and 1896, who found that "precocious children are heavier and dull children are lighter than the mean children of the same age." Holmes (394) discussed

this work in 1894 and Boas (86) in 1895. Positive findings have been confirmed or supplemented as follows: in Russia by Gratsianoff (313) 1889, and Sack (681) 1892,-in America by Hartwell (351) 1894-95; West (873) 1896; Macdonald (490-492) 1897-98 and 1910; Hastings (355) 1899; Christopher (171) 1900; Smedley (764) 1900; Beyer (65) 1900; Zirkle (911) 1902; Debusk (203) 1913; Mead (513) 1914; Grover (325) 1915; Donaldson (215) 1915; Stewart (780) 1916; Busk (140) 1917; Courtis (179) 1917; and Baldwin (25, 27 and 30) 1911, 1914 and 1920,-in Germany by Schmidt and Lessenich (725) 903; Graupner (314) 1904; Bayerthal (40) 1905-1910; Rietz (658) 1906; and Spielrein (768) 1916.

PART V

CHAPTER X

COMPARATIVE TABLES

These comparative tables are roughly grouped in three sections: I. Infants, II. Pre-School, III. School Children and Adults. Section I comprises children under one year, Section II those under six years, and Section III those over six years. In some cases where an investigator gives only a few measurements which should go under one section while the majority belong in another section, these age limits have not been strictly followed.

Some of the tables are continuations of tables in a preceding section. In such cases this fact is noted in the footnote. There are for Infants 59 tables, Pre-School Children 93 tables, School Children 491 tables, Total 643. Recorded number of cases 5,385,463.

The insertion of the symbol ** in a column of measurements indicates that the investigator gives some further data, usually on only a few cases and at such irregular age intervals as to make inclusion in these tables impracticable.

Within each of the three sections the tables are grouped according to the nationality of the subjects to facilitate comparisons of the measurements of similar racial groups. Within a nationality the arrangement of the names of the investigators, and consequently of the tables, is alphabetical. The columns and their descriptive footnotes are numbered consecutively, a complete number series being used for each of the following: Infants, Pre-School, Height of Males, Height of Females, Weight of Males and Weight of Females.

Each column also bears before the name of the investigator a number (sometimes joined with a letter) which will enable the reader to identify within each of the three sections the corresponding measurements resulting from the same investigation. For example, within the Pre-School Section, the figure 1 b recurring in Height of Males, Height of Females, Weight of Males and Weight of Females, is used always to designate measurements of a group of American born Bohemians studied by Boas. The figures 1 c, 1 d, etc. refer to other groups studied in the course of the same general investigation designated by the number 1. If Boas had made other investigations,

« AnteriorContinuar »