240 
EMPLOYMENT PSYCHOLOGY 
of method, attempts have been made to transform it 
into a reliable and scientific method of character analysis. 
In fact, there has been no hesitation on the part of those 
making this attempt to dignify their method by calling 
it a science. This so-called science has received wide 
publicity and has been accepted by many prominent and 
hard-headed business men. It attempts to place observa 
tion on a scientific basis by assuming that certain ob 
servable physical characteristics are identified with certain 
definite mental qualities, and by asserting as a corollary 
that a visual observation and measurement of the physical 
characteristics enable the observer to gauge a person’s 
mental, moral, and emotional qualities. The smattering 
of scientific phraseology in the presentation of this method 
is just sufficient to impress those who have only a super 
ficial knowledge of the scientific facts involved. For in 
stance, one of the statements made is that scientists have 
proved that a large head indicates a large brain and conse 
quently a capable mind. Now, as a matter of fact, 
scientists have worked over this point for fifty years or 
more without reaching such a conclusion. After having 
measured thousands of heads and investigated thousands 
of cases, their general conclusion is that, although there 
may be a general agreement between size of the skull and 
intellectual ability, the agreement is too indefinite to 
apply to individual cases or to use as a basis for practical 
predictions. (For a short and comprehensive account and 
bibliography on this point, see G. M. Whipple, “ Manual 
of Mental and Physical Tests”, Vol. I, pp. 79-91.) On the 
other hand, biologists and physiologists tell us that mental 
power is determined not so much by the size of the bead or 
the expansion of the brain, as by the convolutions and the 
quality of the brain structure. Another claim advanced is