![](bgd.jpg)
avoided, but that is one of the perils of the first development. The mother institute in Boston,
too, under its new direction emphasizes more the economic and hygienic side, and has set its
centre of gravity in a systematic effort to propagate understanding of the problems of vocational
guidance and to train professional vocational counselors in systematic courses, who are then to
carry the interest over the land.[4]
The real psychological analysis with which the movement began has, therefore, been
somewhat pushed aside for a while, and the officers of those institutes declare frankly that they
want to return to the mental problem only after professional psychologists have sufficiently
worked out the specific methods for its mastery. Most counselors seem to feel instinctively that
the core of the whole matter lies in the psychological examination, but they all agree that for
this they must wait until the psychological laboratories can furnish them with really reliable
means and schemes. Certainly it is very important, for instance, that boys with weak lungs be
kept away from such industrial vocations as have been shown by the statistics to be dangerous
for the lungs, or that the onrush to vocations be stopped where the statistics allow it to be
foreseen that there will soon be an over-supply [p. 43] of workers. But, after all, it remains much
more decisive for the welfare of the community, and for the future life happiness of those who
leave the school, that every one turn to those forms of work to which his psychological traits are
adjusted, or at least that he be kept away from those in which his mental qualities and
dispositions would make a truly successful advance improbable.
The problem accordingly has been handed over from the vocational counselors to the
experimental psychologists, and it is certainly in the spirit of the modern tendency toward
applied psychology that the psychological laboratories undertake the investigation and withdraw
it from the dilettantic discussion of amateur psychologists or the mere impressionism of the
school-teachers. Even those early beginnings indicate clearly that the goal can be reached only
through exact, scientific, experimental research, and that the mere naïve methods -- for
instance, the filling-out of questionnaires which may be quite useful in the first approach --
cannot be sufficient for a real, persistent furtherance of economic life and of the masses who
seek their vocations. In order to gain an analysis of the individual, Parsons made every
applicant answer in writing a long series of questions which referred to his habits and his [p. 44]
emotions, his inclinations and his expectations, his traits and his experiences. The psychologist,
however, can hardly be in doubt that just the mental qualities which ought to be most important
for the vocational counselor can scarcely be found out by such methods. We have emphasized
before that the ordinary individual knows very little of his own mental functions: on the whole,
he knows them as little as he knows the muscles which he uses when he talks or walks. Among
his questions Parsons included such ones as: "Are your manners quiet, noisy, boisterous,
deferential, or self-assertive? Are you thoughtful of the comfort of others? Do you smile
naturally and easily, or is your face ordinarily expressionless? Are you frank, kindly, cordial,
respectful, courteous in word and actions? Do you look people frankly in the eye? Are your in
inflections natural, courteous, modest, musical, or aggressive, conceited, pessimistic,
repellent? What are your powers of attention, observation, memory, reason, imagination,
inventiveness, thoughtfulness, receptiveness, quickness, analytical power, constructiveness,
breadth, grasp? Can you manage people well? Do you know a fine picture when you see it? Is
your will weak, yielding, vacillating, or firm, strong, stubborn? Do you like to be with people and
do they like to be with you?" -- and [p. 45] so on. It is clear that the replies to questions of this
kind can be of psychological value only when the questioner knows beforehand the mind of the
youth, and can accordingly judge with what degree of understanding, sincerity, and ability the
circular blanks have been filled out. But as the questions are put for the very purpose of
revealing the personality, the entire effort tends to move in a circle.
To break this circle, it indeed becomes necessary to emancipate one's self from the method of
ordinary self-observation and to replace it by objective experiment in the psychological
laboratory. Experimentation in such a laboratory stands in no contrast to the method of
introspection. A contrast does exist between self-observation and observation on children or
patients or primitive peoples or animals. In their case the psychologist observes his material
from without. But in the case of the typical laboratory experiment, everything is ultimately based
on self-observation; only we have to do with the self-observation under exact conditions which
the experimenter is able to control and to vary at will. Even Parsons sometimes turned to little