The results are given in Table VI., where the numerals in the
headings indicate the localities and changes of stimulation, in
accordance with the preceding scheme, and _'S'_, _'E'_ and _'L'_
designate the number of judgments of _shorter_, _equal_ and _longer_
respectively.

It will be observed that in several cases a _CT_ was introduced in one
class which was different from the _CT_ used in the other classes with
the same subject. This was not entirely arbitrary. It was found with
subject _W_, for example, that the use of _CT_ = 2.0 in (3) produced
judgments of shorter almost entirely in both types. Therefore a _CT_
was found, by trial, which produced a diversity of judgments. The
comparison of the different classes is not so obvious under these
conditions as it otherwise would be, but is still possible.

The comparison gives results which at first appear quite irregular.
These are shown in Table VII. below, where the headings (1)--(3),
etc., indicate the classes compared, and in the lines beneath them
'+' indicates that the interval under consideration is estimated as
relatively greater (more overestimated or less underestimated) in the
second of the two classes than in the first,--indicating the opposite
effect. Results for the first interval are given in the line denoted
'first,' and for the second interval in the line denoted 'second.'
Thus, the plus sign under (1)--(3) in the first line for subject _P_
indicates that the variation _RLL_ caused the first interval to be
overestimated to a greater extent than did the variation 133.