!"#$%&'()*'"+,-#.+/01#23#!&&,('"+#4'5,6)2(!/+52(789:#;()+<#=')0'(#,"0#>,(),""'#.)**'.2/(?':#@5'#!*'()?,"#A2/(",-#23#B81?52-2C1D#E2-F#GHD#I2F#J#7!&(FD#KLMM9D#&&F#JMNOJGL
B/P-)85'0#P1:#Q")6'(8)+1#23#R--)"2)8#B('88.+,P-'#QST:#http://www.jstor.org/stable/1416950!??'88'0:#KKUKJUJVVL#VW:JK
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=illinois.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

University of Illinois Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The
American Journal of Psychology.

http://www.jstor.org

AN EXPERIMENTAL STUDY OF APPARENT BEHAVIOR
By FRITZ HEIER and MARIANNE SIMMEL, Smith College

The processes which are involved in perceiving other individuals,
their behavior and their personal qualities, have received but little
attention in psychological literature.' Although these processes arebasic in almost any social act, few experimental investigations relating
to them are to be found. It is true that there have been studies concerning the inference of emotions from gestures or facial change. But
most of these leave the reader with a feeling of disappointment andwith the conviction that facial 'expressions'-at least as taken bythemselves-do not play an important role in the perception of otherpersons. We are usually referred to the 'importance of the situation';
but what features of the situation are of importance or how the situation influences the perception are problems which are left unanswered.
The reason is that research in this field has seldom been carried out
from the point of view of the psychology of perception. The problem
usually studied has concerned the 'correct'interpretation of expression,and not the stimulus-configurations as a determinant of interpretation. The same is true of another group of related investigations which
concern the correctness of our judgments of others. If processes ofperception are mentioned they are treated only so far as they impair
the correctness of judgment.
In the investigation of the apprehension of colors, forms, or movement, which has attained a more mature stage of development, questions of achievement or correctness-though these still play a role oflegitimate importance with some psychologists (e.g. E. Brunswik)have largely given way to other problems. When the perception of
movement is investigated, it is with the purpose of finding out which
stimulus conditions are relevant in the production of phenomenal
movement and of determining the influences of the surrounding field.
Only when we attempt to answer these questions can we hope to* Accepted for publication, January 13, 1944.
The word perception is used in this paper in the sense of cognitive response, i.e.
as covering all cognitive processes which follow the exposure of a set of receptors tostimulation.
243

244

HEIDER AND SIMMEL

deepen our insight into the processes of perception, whether of movement or of other human beings.
The experiments on the perception of the behavior of others herereported are in method and purpose different from the investigations
mentioned. In the first place, instead of presenting faces with the exclusion of the situation, we have presented situations and activities
without the face. Secondly, our aim has not been to determine thecorrectnessof the response but instead the dependence of the responseon stimulus-configurations.
THE EXPERIMENTS

Method. Our subjectswere requestedto interpreta moving picture-filmof about 21/2 min. durationin which three geometricalfigures (a large

4

FIG. 1. EXPOSURE-OBJECTS DISPLAYED IN VARIOUS POSITIONSAND CONFIGURATIONSFROM THE MOVING FILM.

Large triangle, small triangle, disc and house.

triangle, a small triangle and a disc, also called a circle) were shown
moving in various directions and at various speeds. The only otherfigure in the field was a rectangle, a section of which could be opened
and closed as a door is. The film, one frame of which is shown in Fig. 1,
was produced by a trick-filmmethod. The geometricalfigures were cut
from cardboardand placed on a horizontaltranslucent-glassplate illuminated from above. A mirror below the plate threw the image into theA STUDY OF APPARENT BEHAVIOR

245

camera. After each exposure the figures which were to be shown inmotion were moved a short distance, then another exposure was made,and so on.
In the following descriptionof the main features of the picture, theaction is, for purposesof reference,divided into scenes. A few 'anthropomorphic'words are used since a descriptionin purely geometricalterms.would be too complicated and too difficult to understand. The large
triangle is referredto by T, the small triangle by t, the disc by c (circle)
and the rectangleby 'house.'
1. T moves toward the house, opens door, moves into the house andcloses door.
2. t and c appearand move aroundnear the door
3. T moves out of the house toward t
4. T and t fight, T wins: during the fight, c moves into the house
5. T moves into the house and shuts door
6. T chasesc within the house: t moves along the outside of the housetowardthe door
7. t opens the door and c moves out of the house and t and c closethe door
8. T seems to try to get out of the house but does not succeedin opening the door: t and c move in circles around outside of the house andtouch each other severaltimes
9. T opens the door and comes out of the house
10. T chasest and c twice aroundthe house
11. t and c leave the field
12. T hits the walls of the house severaltimes: the walls break
The scenes of the picture shown in advancingorder will be referred
to by f (forward) added to the numberof the scene, those of the picture
shown in reverseby r.
Three experimentswere performedwith three differentgroupsof undergraduatewomen: 34 Ss in Exper.i: 36 in Exper.ii; 44 in Exper.iii. In all
three the film was shown twice, instructionsgiven before the presentationof the film. The time allowed for describingthe pictureand answeringthe
questionswas not limited.
In the first experiment,instructionswere general; "write down what
happenedin the picture."
In a second (the main) experiment,S was instructedto interpretthe
movementsof the figures as actions of persons and a short sealed questionarywas preparedwhich S was asked to open and answer after view-

246

HEIDER AND SIMMEL

ing the picture. It containedthe following questions; (1) What kind ofa person is the big triangle? (2) What kind of a person is the little
triangle? (3) What kind of a person is the circle (disc) ? (4) Why did
the two trianglesfight? (5) Why did the circlego into the house? (6) In
one part of the movie the big triangle and the circle were in the house
together. What did the big triangle do then? Why? (7) What did thecircle do when it was in the house with the big triangle? Why? (8) In
one part of the movie the big trianglewas shut up in the house and tried
to get out. What did the little triangle and the circle do then? (9) Why
did the big triangle break the house? (10) Tell the story of the movie
in a few sentences.
In the third experimentthe same picture was shown in reverse.S was
instructedto answer Questions 1, 2, 3, and 10, above.
RESULTSIn Exper. i the instructions were general, in order to find out how
many Ss would perceive the picture in terms of animated beings. A
large majority of them did. Only one S described the film almost entirely in geometrical terms. Her report follows.
A large solid triangle is shown entering a rectangle. It enters andcomes out of this rectangle, and each time the corner and one-half of
one of the sides of the rectangleform an opening. Then another,smaller
triangle and a circle appearon the scene. The circle enters the rectangle
while the largertriangleis within. The two move aboutin circularmotion
and then the circle goes out of the opening and joins the smaller triangle
which has been moving around outside the rectangle. Then the smaller
triangle and the circle move about together and when the larger triangle
comes out of the rectangleand approachesthem, they move rapidly in acircle aroundthe rectangleand disappear.The largertriangle, now alone,moves about the opening of the rectangle and finally goes through the
opening to the inside. He (sic!) moves rapidly within, and, finding no
opening, breaksthroughthe sides and disappears.
All other Ss interpretedthe movementsas actionsof animatebeings, inmost cases of persons; in two cases of birds. Nineteen Ss reported aconnected story. Two examples of this last group are given below, thefirst representativeof the interpretationcommonlymade in the group, thesecondan excerptof a reportshowing unusualelaboration.
(1) A man has planned to meet a girl and the girl comes along with

A STUDY OF APPARENTBEHAVIOR

247

another man. The first man tells the second to go; the second tells thefirst, and he shakes his head. Then the two men have a fight, and thegirl starts to go into the room to get out of the way and hesitates andfinally goes in. She apparentlydoes not want to be with the first man.
The first man follows her into the room after having left the secondin a rather weakened condition leaning on the wall outside the room.
The girl gets worried and races from one corner to the other in the farpart of the room. Man numberone, after being rathersilent for a while,
makes several approachesat her; but she gets to the corner across fromthe door, just as man numbertwo is trying to open it. He evidently got
banged around and is still weak from his efforts to open the door. The
girl gets out of the room in a sudden dash just as man numbertwo getsthe door open. The two chase around the outside of the room together,followed by man number one. But they finally elude him and get away.
The firstman goes back and tries to open his door, but he is so blinded byrageand frustrationthathe cannotopen it. So he buttsit open and in a reallymad dash aroundthe room he breaksin first one wall and then another.
(2) The first thing we see in this little episode is triangle number-one
closing the door of his square. Let's insist that the action of the play ison a two-dimensionalsurface (not that it makes much difference) and
we will undoubtedlystartcalling the squarein which the trianglenumberone seems to make his dwelling, a house, which infers three dimensions.
But we are not sticking to the theme of our story.
Triangle number-oneshuts his door (or should we say line) and thetwo innocentyoung things walk in. Loversin the two-dimensionalworld,
no doubt; little triangle number-twoand sweet circle. Triangle-one (hereafter known as the villain) spies the young love. Ah! . . . He opens his
door, walks out to see our hero and his sweet. But our hero does notlike the interruption(we regret that our actualknowledge of what wenton at this particularmoment is slightly hazy, I believe we didn't get theexact conversation), he attackstriangle-onerathervigorously (maybe thebig bully said some bad word).
In this experimenta few featureswere commonto all reportssave thatfirst quoted (using geometricalterms). These common features follow.
In Scene 4, T and t fight; in Scene 8, T is shut up in the house and tries
to get out; in Scene 10, T chasest and c; throughoutthe picture,T, t andc move the door (the door never moves the actors).
In Exper. ii, all Ss followed instructionsand interpretedthe movements
as human actions.We shall try to indicatethe degree of uniformityfound248

HEIDER AND SIMMELin the answers. The reasons given for the interpretationsare necessarily
only tentative and based on impressionsin viewing the picture.
Questions 4 and 10 refer to the main interpretations.Q. 4: 'Why did
the two trianglesfight?' and Q. 10: 'Tell the story of the movie in a few
sentences.'All reportshave in common the following features.
(1). T and t fight. The events of impulsion with sudden impact giverise to this interpretation.(2) t and c belong together and are in antagonismto T. The reasonfor this is that during the courseof the picturet and c are frequentlyshown moving together,they appeartogether in thefield and they leave the field together. On the other hand, t fights T,
and c is chased by T. The fight between T and t is the central event andthe stories can best be classifiedin terms of the cause of this fight. In 11
cases (30%) this cause lies in the personalityof T. T is an aggressive
bully and he attackst, or t and c, without any further reason. In one ofthese cases, T is a witch who tries to catch the children t and c. In theremainingcases the cause lies, at least in part, in the situation.The mostcommoninterpretation(18 cases, 50%) is that T and t are two men whofight over the girl or woman c.
This story has severalvariations:T does not want to marryc; T is thevillain, t the hero and c his sweetheart;the wife c of T came home withanotherman. In three cases it is stated that T and t fight over c, but noallusion is made to an erotic triangle. In opposition to these cases arethose in which the cause of the fight lies in the behaviorof t and c. Two
Ss write that T is provokedto his aggressionby the fact that t and c teasehim; in one case the fight startedbecauset and c want to regain the house
which T had taken from them; one S reportsthat T is an angry mother
who wants to punish her two children becausethey came home late.
Thus S obtains a unified story and a centraltheme by referringto thecausesof the events as seen in the picture.
Q. 1: What kind of a person is the big triangle?
The personalityof T is judged with great uniformity.The expressions
used are classifiedbelow in groups containingwords with similar meaning. After each group is indicated the number and (after the larger
groups) also the percentageof Ss who used at least one word of a given
group.
Aggressive, warlike, belligerent, pugnacious,quarrelsome,troublesome,mean, angry,bad-tempered,temperamental,irritable,quick to take offense,bully, villain, taking advantageof his size, picking on smaller people,
dominating,power-loving,possessive.N = 35 (97%)
Strong, forceful, slow but powerful. N = 5 (14%)

A STUDY OF APPARENT BEHAVIOR

249

Dumb, stupid, apt to get confused, more strengththan brains.N = 3(8%)
Ugly, not attractive,spoiled, always on defensive, shy, crafty and sly.
One S each.
We might expect that T would be describeddifferentlyaccordingto
whetherthe cause of the fight is seen to lie in his personalcharacteristics
or in the situation.Even an averageman can become aggressivewhen heis provoked.T is almost alwaysdescribed,however,as an aggressivebully,
even in the cases in which the fight starts,becauset and c tease T. The
reason lies probablyin the way he fights t. He is portrayedin the picture
as hitting t relentlessly until t cannot move and is pinned against thewall.
T makes the impressionof being strong, probablynot so much becauseof his greater size as becausehe wins in the fight with t. The interpretation "T defeats t" itself is based on the following data: T hits t more
often than t hits T; t is driven backwardby T; at the end of the fightt standsmotionless againstthe wall while T hits him.
That T is described (3 Ss) as stupid is a consequenceof the interpretation "T is fooled by t and c," i.e. T is locked up in his house by t andc and is thus frustratedin his attemptto chase them.
Q. 2: What kind of a person is the small triangle?
Heroic, valiant,brave,courageous,fearless,defiant,more aggressivethanc, independent, resents being bullied, a fighter, does not allow himself
to submit, spirited, cocky, snappy. N = 17 (47%)
Timidly aggressive, antagonizer,then afraid, not too brave, quick to
run away.N = 4 (11c%)
Cagy, sly, crafty, tricky, wary, brains instead of brawn, clever, intellectual. N = 13 (36%)
Weak, not very strong. N = 6 (17 %)Protective,loyal, devoted. N = 5 (14%)
Inquisitive, likes to tease, appealing, attractive,more personality,lessforce, persevering,persistent,quiet. (One S each)
Figure t is called braveby many because,though smallerthan T, he hitsback and defends himself and c. He is clever and tricky because he ismore active than c and thereforehe is usually consideredthe causeof thelocking up of T.
In 4 cases there is reportedan element of cowardicein the descriptionof t. We can assumethat in these cases the reason for his going back in
the fight may then be differentlyregarded,i.e. not his physical inferiority
to T, but his fear of T.

250

HEIDER AND SIMMEL

Q. 3: What kind of personis the circle?
Does not like fighting, is frightened, afraid, fearful, cowardly, shy,timid, meek, not too sure of herself, goes where t goes, a follower, notmuch personalityof her own, less initiative and nerve, relies for protection on t, helpless, dependent.N = 27 (75%)
Girl, woman, female, feminine. N = 22 (61%)
Shrewd,intelligent, clever, smart.N = 5 (14%)
Courageous,resistent, has courage. N = 4 (11%)
Weak. N = 3 (8%)

Opportunist,looks after own good, teasing, curious,playful, good natured, more gentle, very refined, nervous, retiring, beautiful, loyal, affectionate, coming to aid when necessary.(One S each)
The withdrawingof c during the fight and the fact that c never hits
T accountsfor the descriptionof it as 'afraid, meek," etc. Some Ss obviouslymake c at least partlyresponsiblefor the ruse played on T and callc clever.
Q. 5: Why did the circle go into the house?
For protection,afraid to watch fight, frightened by fighting, to get outof the way of the fight, scared, tried to hide, for shelter against T, toescape villain T, afraid of what T might do to t. N = 33 (92%)
2 Ss have c chased in or forced in by T, and one S makes c go in order"to lure T in and trap it:"In the first and second experiments,the majority of Ss interpret theevent as 'hiding' (though not alwaysusing this word). This high degreeof uniformity is probablyproduced by the simultaneousevent of T andt fighting and the movements of c preceding c's entranceto the house.
It is clear that c is afraidof the fight.
Q. 6: In one part of the picture, the big triangle and the circle werein the house together.What did the big triangledo then? Why?
T always subject, c object: went after, tried to catch, chased, cornered,trapped,tried to get closer to, tried to pin down, attacked,tried to harm,
to kill, to torture,punished,pushedinto corner.N = 27 (75%)
Tried to kiss, made love to. N = 3 (8%)
Was mad at and scolded; stood in front of c keeping c in suspense,
closed the door to keep t out, stood guardat door afraidthat t would comein, did not know what to do. (One S each)
The high degree of uniformity in the answers to this question is determinedmainly by the temporalrelationshipsof the movements.It is acase of successive movements without contact, which will be describedlater.

A STUDY OF APPARENT BEHAVIOR

251

Q. 7: What did the circle do when it was in the house with the big
triangle? Why?
Ran away from, avoided, eluded, evaded, stayed away from, tried toescape, did not want T to catch her, was almost captured,retreated,ran
into corner, was afraid of, scared, terrified, frightened, shrank from,became nervous, disliked, was bored with. N = 33 (92%)
Tried to distractT's attention from t, tried to tempt T into attacking
it so that it could shut T in the house, fought with T. (One S each)
Most of the Ss report that c tried to run away from T partly because
c was afraidof T. N = 14 (39%); partlybecausec disliked,or was bored

by, T. N = 3 (8%).

In two cases c is seen as cause; c tried to distractor tempt T. These
cases belong to those exceptionsin which c is describedas playing a more
active role ("resistantand courageous"and "coming to aid when necessary").
Q. 8: In one part of the picture the big triangle was shut up in thehouse and tried to get out. What did the little triangle and the circle dothen?
Were elated, happy, glad, joyful. N= 8 (22%)
Kissed each other. N = 3 (8%)
Congratulatedeach other and shook hands very pleased (1)The other answerseitherdescribedmerelythe movements('ran around')or referredto the scene immediatelyfollowing (escaped).
The interpretationof the circularmovementsof c and t around eachother and of their touching each other, as expressionsof joyful emotion,is probably determinedto a high degree by the preceding events; T islocked up in the house and t and c are together again.
Q. 9: Why did the big triangle breakthe house? 34 Ss (95%?) write
to the effect that T was mad and thwartedbecause c and t had escaped.
The act is again interpretedas an indicationof emotion. One S puts theblame partly on T's personality (a problem child). Two connect the act
more definitelywith the house. "T decided that it wasn't a strong enoughtrap to capture anybody,"and "the purpose of the house could not be
fulfilled without the circle, and then there would be no need for it."
These results show the possibility of investigatingthus the perceptionof behaviorof persons. The stimulus has many geometricaland temporalfeatureswhich can be defined in an exact way and which can be varied
infinitely. The tentative analysisof the answersto the questionaryseems
also to point to the great importancewhich causal interpretationplays in
the organizationof the events into a story. A few events stand out and252

HEIDER AND SIMMEL

are seen by all Ss in the same way; these events are organized into ameaningful whole which contains causal centers (persons). Events andpersonsgain their significanceby the way they are causallyconnected.
In Exper. iii, the picture was shown in reverse.All but two Ss againinterpretedthe movements as human actions. The interpretationsshow
much more variation and, presumably,more projection than those ofExper. ii, and do not lend themselvesto a quantitativeanalysis.Some of
the resultsreferringto single scenes will be given in the next section.
Following are three examplesof the answersto the question: "Tell thestory of the movie in a few sentences."
Man (T) finds himself in chaos, which finally resolves itself into asort of cell representingFate. He is able to free himself (but only temporarily), when Woman (c) accompaniedby Evil (t) comes upon him,and disrupts his momentarypeace. He feels called upon to rescue her,but Evil imprisonsthem both by Fate, from which Man escapes,leaving
the woman there for safe-keeping.He at first seems to vanquishEvil, but
Woman comes into the picture again and again disruptsMan. She goes
off with Evil, as he seems the winner of the struggle, and Man, not understandingher, himself, or anything,resigns himself to Fate.
T is supposed to be in jail. The little ball (c) has come to kill him.
When c and T are in the cell, t comes down to tell c how to kill T, T
escapes, and t, unable to kill him, finally puts him back in the cell. The
executionerand the keeper,thinking that their prisoneris safely locked in,go away; but the prisonermanagesto escape unnoticed.
The story might be interpretedas an argumentbetween husband andwife over child. The big triangle is the father, the smaller triangle themother,and the disc the child. The fathersent the child off in a room. The
mother tries to persuadeit to come out. When the child cannot be persuaded, the father and mother have a fight about it. The mother assails
the father who does little to fight back. Finally the child comes out andgoes off with his mother, leaving the father alone.
ANALYSIS OF THE RESULTS

We shall now attempt to answer in a more systematic way thequestion of how the interpretations arise.
Interpretation of the movement combinations. (1) Successive movements with momentary contact. We shall first consider the stimulusconditions for elementary actions. Scene 4f offers an easy approach tosuch an analysis. Most of our Ss in Exper. i described this event in the

A STUDY OF APPARENTBEHAVIOR

253

jame way and, indeed, the apprehensionof the moving T and t as
hitting each other is phenomenallycompelling.In orderto begin ourand thenanalysiswe shall have to describethe stimulus-configuration
to make clearthe term 'hitting.'The stimulusconsistsof co6rdinatedmovementsof T and t. T rapidlyapproachest until it comesinto contact with it. Then T stands still while, at the moment of contact,tstartsmoving in the directionof T's previousmovement.S has thestrong impressionof a transferof kinetic energy from T to t. One
could almost speak of an 'apparentmovement'of energy.T's movement is clearlythe cause and t's movement ('reeling backunder the
impactof T's blows') is the effect. This phenomenalrelationshipis
obviously determinedby temporalsuccessionand spatial proximity.
The good continuationof the line-the fact that the directionof t's
movementcontinuesthe directionof T's probablyplays a role in theconvincingappearanceof this apparentenergeticmovement.
Anotherexampleof causationby impactoccursin Scene12f, which
all Ss in Exper. i interpretedas 'T breakingthe house.' Again theimpressionof an apparentmovementof energy is very strong. The
effect consistshere, not merelyin a backwardmovementof the units
as struckbut also in a breakingto pieces.
(2) Simultaneousmovementswith prolongedcontact.When theactors (T, t or c) are seen opening or closing the door, they seem to
impartmovementto the door, not by sudden impactbut by pushingor pulling in prolonged contact. The stimulus-conditionsare very
simple: when T 'opens'or 'shuts'the door, T and the door move together in contact.The problemat once arisesas to what determines
which of two things moving togethershall be seen as the origin andwhich as recipientof the movement.In the case of impulsionby sudden impactjust considered,the causalorigin is determinedby succession in the events. In the case of slow pushing or pulling the local
stimulus-conditionsare insufficientfor a full determinationof theorigin of locomotion.
Actuallythe interpretationsare highly uniform in the case of thedoor. All Ss see the actorsas pushing or pulling the door. This istrue whetherthe pictureis shown forwardor in reverse.A scene in
the 'forward'film in which T closes the door by pushing is interpreted in reverse as 'T opens the door by pulling.' The reversal

254

HEIDER AND SIMMEL

changes only the activity, not the origin. With impulsion by suddencontact it is different; reversal changes the temporal relation of theevents and thereby the origin. What is seen in the forward picture as
T hitting t, is seen in reverse as t hitting T.
The reason for the fact that T, t or c, rather than the door, is always seen as origin must lie in the larger field in which the local event
door-actor-movement is embedded. The door never moves of itself,
i.e. without another moving unit in contact with it. T, t and c continually move around by themselves. These units are therefore described as 'persons,' as potential origins of movement. If the door had
been shown in other parts of the picture as moving independently, andT (for instance) as never moving alone, then a combined movementof the door and T would be ascribed to the door as origin, the door
would push T.
(3) Simultaneous movements without contact. The situation issomewhat similar when two or more units move in the same direction,
one behind the other, without touching each other. Such stimulusconditions are again ambiguous and the interpretation will vary according to the place of origin of the movement. Let A be the front
unit and B the back unit. Then if A is seen as origin, A will 'lead' B.
If B is seen as origin, B will 'chase' A. In leading or chasing, bothunits have to move under their own power, both must be persons or
animals, and the transmission of movement is not by means of physical, but by means of psychological, causation.
Again the surrounding data can determine the phenomenal positionof the origin.
In Scene lOf there occurs an event which was in almost all cases interpretedas "T chases t and c." The film order is as follows; T, t and cmove together,but not in contactwith each other, twice aroundthe house.
T moves behind t and c. We can safely say that the reasonfor this uniform
interpretationof T as the origin lies in the interpretationof the previous
parts of the picture. The event 'T chases t and c' is coordinatedto twofacts; T is stronger than t and c, and there is an antagonismbetween
T and the pair t and c. These two features are contained in almost allinterpretationsof the 'forward'picture. Therefore, the event has to beinterpretedas "T chasest and c" if it is to conformto what has happened
before.

A STUDY OF APPARENTBEHAVIOR

255

In the reverse picture, we do not find such uniformity in the interpretation of Scene 10. In only 13 cases (31% of the 42 Ss who
were able to follow instructions) the event is dealt with explicitly. In
9 cases the origin is put definitely in T or in t and c.
Since in the r-picture c and t move behind T, the interpretationis'c and t chase T' when c and t are taken as the origin (4 cases), and'T leads c and t' when T is the origin (5 cases). Which interpretationis
taken depends again on the interpretationof the rest of the story andthe kind of personsthe actorsare taken to be. In the 4 cases with t and cas origin, T has the following characteristics;(1) T has done wrong,t and c rout T, (2) T timid, t fierce, (3) T a coward, (4) T is cautious,
prudent. The 5 cases with T as the origin have the following features;(1) T is a bully, mean, clever and constructive (he has constructeda
house and then shown the outside of the house to t and c), (2) T isaggressive (he tries to lead t and c into the house), (3) T is dictatorialand stubborn(he wants to rent his house to t and c and shows it to them),(4) T is a bully and playful (he lures t and c into the house), (5) T is aperson of initiative, a good business man (he tries to sell his idea or his
house to t and c and shows it to them).
The r-picture has no definite organization and it lends itself to very
different interpretations. But each interpretation presents a unified
whole and these parts, which are ambiguous as parts, are made to fit
the whole. And one of the most important sources of ambiguity is
the possibility of seeing the origin of changes in different individuals.
If one sees two animals running in file through high grass, one willinterpret these movements in accordance with other data. If the one
in front is a rabbit and the one behind a dog, he will perceive a dog
chasing a rabbit. If the first one is a big rabbit and the second a small
one, he will not see 'chasing' but 'leading' and 'following.'(4) Successive movements without contact. In Scene 6f, T and c
are in the house and the following movements occur; c stands in one
corner, T approaches c suddenly but before T reaches c, c suddenly
moves to another corner. This sequence is repeated several times. The
movements of T and c are again successive. The origin is determinedby the temporal relationship. In Exper. ii (Q6), 95% of the Ss interpret the event as 'T chases c' or 'T is the aggressor, c tries to evadeT,' etc.

256

HEIDER AND SIMMELIn the r-picturethis event is interpretedonly 4 times.Threetimes cis the origin (rc tries to driveT out of the house';' tries to catchT';ec keeps T inside the house'). In one case the interpretationis ambiguous; T, surprisedat firstby intruderc, findsher unresponsiveto
any friendly overtures.'
The unit which moves first is again more likely to be seen as theorigin. It is anothercase of post hoc ergo propterhoc and a reversalof successionreversesthe attributionof origin.
Causalorigins.Thus we see that the interpretationof these simple
movement-combinations
variesaccordingto the unit seen as the origin.
The movementsof lines and figuresare the stimuli;but these movements becomeanchoredin a field of objectsand personsand are interpretedas acts.The distinctionbetweenperceptionthat is relatively
more directedby the stimulusand a perceptionthat is more directedby the objectcan be appliedin this caseas legitimatelyas, for instance,in color-perception.Phenomenalmovementsper se are comparableto
reductioncolors, and actsof personsare comparableto object-colors.
In both cases we can speak of attribution.In the case of color-perceptionthe color is attributedin differentdegreeseither to objector
the movement
to illumination.In the case of movement-combinationsis attributedto the one or the other moving unit.2
In otherwords,the movements(or, moregenerally,anychangesin
the field) are organizedin termsof actsof persons.It is obviousthat
this organizationhas many advantagesfrom the point of view ofachievement,i.e. from the point of view of the adaptationof the organism to the environment.The changes, when identified with aconstantfiguralunit, no longer follow each other in an arbitraryand
unconnectedway. They are connectedwith invariablecharacteristicsof the environment,they are meaningfullyembeddedin our pictureof reality.We saw how the interpretationof movementsis intimatelyof the actors,
connectedwith the interpretationof personality-traits
invariancies.
ofi.e. with the interpretation
But this organizationmust be consideredalso from the point ofview of performance.What processestake part in it? How is this2
The term 'attribution' describes what happens only in a formal and intellectualistic way since the actual process of perception does not start with an awareness of
reduction-colors which are then turned into object-colors.

A STUDY OF APPARENT BEHAVIOR

257

result attained?These questionscannot be answeredon the basis ofthese experiments.It might be useful, however, to try to use an
hypothesis of unit-formation.The movements and changes are insomewayidentifiedwith figuralunits andtherebygain the significanceof acts. Are personsunits consistingof figuralunits and movements
as their parts?And if movementsare at all consideredas parts, arethey partsof a specialkind?Does this unit-formationfollow some of
the laws of purelyfiguralunit-formation?
These aresomeof the questions to which such an hypothesiswould lead us. In tryingto answer
them we may come nearerto an adequatetheory.
Needs as origins. So far we have only consideredthe attributionof the origin of movementto personsas a whole. Often the attribution
goes beyondthat. The descriptionsnot only makeclearwhich person,
but also what motive or need within that person, is responsiblefor
the movement.As a matterof fact, as soon as we ascribea certain
movementto a figuralunit andconsiderthis unit as an animatedbeing,
perceptionof motive or need is involved. When we see T hitting t
we seem to perceiveat the same time that T wants to hurt t. When
we see T chasingc the fact of T wantingto catchc seemsto be implied.
But often the attributionto motive adds somethingand differentiates
between differentinterpretationsof actionswith the same person asof the eventsof 'entering'origin.This can be seen in the interpretationand 'leaving.'
During the pictureit happensseveraltimes that one of the actors(T or c) moveseitherin or out of the house.Thesemovements,which
can be definedin topologicalterms as enteringor leaving the regionof the house, give rise to various interpretations.The moving-in iscalled hiding, being-forced-in,being-lured-in,etc. The moving out iscalled escaping, being-invited-out,being-let-out,etc. What are theconditionswhich determinewhich of these interpretationsis used todescribeone and the same scene?
When we try to classify these interpretations,we find first of allthat they differ accordingto whether the origin is attributedto theentering or leaving person itself or to anotherperson. To the firstclass belong spontaneousactions (such as hiding or escaping); to thesecond class such induced movements as being-forced-out,beinginvited-in, etc. But these are not the only differenceswhich appear258

HEIDER AND SIMMELin the interpretations. A person can enter a house in order to hide
or in order to look for something in the house. That is to say that,
although the moving person himself is the origin in both cases, themotivation may be different. Expressions like 'going to hide' and'escaping' refer to movements and at the same time to motives.
We cannot read off the motivation from the movements themselves,e.g. from the movement of a circle entering the house. Movementsof the other actors, or of preceding or succeeding events, offer cues
for the determination of motives. In Scene 4f, c enters the house; of
14 Ss who mention the origin of the event in Exper. i, 11 describe
it as hiding, running to shelter (92% in Exper. ii), etc., 2 as beingpushed-in by T, and one as going in 'because c does not want to bewith T.'
When T enters the house in Scene 5f, the event is, in all the 9 cases
where mention is made of the origin (Exper. i), described as T follows
c in, T goes in to pursue c, etc. This interpretation is probably basedon the immediately following Scene 6f, in which T chases c aroundwithin the house. Scene 5f is assimilated in regard to the origin to
Scene 6f and both the movements of entering and the movements ofchasing c are then interpreted as manifestations of the same motive
to catch c. Thus we see that the event 'figure-entering-house' may beinterpreted in many ways; as hiding, as pursuing somebody, or as
being pushed in. The surrounding field determines the motive, andthereby the meaning of the event.
A description of movements in terms of motives again taps environmental layers of greater invariancy. Just as the successive perspective
views of a landscape seen through the window of a moving train can
only be 'resolved,' or made to yield a meaningful unit, by reference
to distant objects laid out in space, so acts of persons have to beviewed in terms of motives in order that the succession of changes
becomes a connected sequence.
SUMMARY

A motion picture which shows movements of three geometricalfigures was the material of the investigation. It was presented to afirst group of 34 Ss with the instruction to describe it; to a second
group (36 Ss) with the instruction to interpret the movements as

A STUDY OF APPARENTBEHAVIOR

259

actions of persons and to answer a number of questions relating tothem. A third group (44 Ss) was treated like the second except thatthe picture was shown in reverse and with fewer questions.
The reports show that all but one S of Group I, all of Group II,
and all but two of Group III interpreted the picture in terms of actionsof animated beings, chiefly of persons. A characteristicfeature of thisorganization in terms of actions is the attribution of the origin of
movements to figural units and to motives. It has been shown that
this attribution of the origin influences the interpretation of the movements, and that it depends in some cases on the characteristicsof the
movements themselves, in others on surrounding objects. The way
in which the actors are judged is closely connected with this attribution of origin. It is held that this method is useful in investigating
the way the behavior of other persons is perceived.