closely associated with the corresponding objective distance as not to feel less than this.  So far as an innervation-feeling might allow us to estimate distance, it could have no other meaning than to represent just that distance through which the innervation will move the organ in question.  If OP is a distance and i is the feeling of such an innervation as will move the eye through that distance, it is inconceivable that i, if it represent any distance at all, should represent any other distance than just OP.

Cornelius[11] brought up the matter a year later than Lipps.  Cornelius criticises the unwarranted presuppositions of Lipps, and himself suggests that the falsely localized streak is due to a slight rebound which the eye, having overshot its intended goal, may make in the opposite direction to regain the mark.  This would undoubtedly explain the phenomenon if such movements of rebound actually took place.  Cornelius himself does not adduce any experiments to corroborate this account.

   [11] Cornelius, C.S., Zeitschrift f.  Psychologie u. 
   Physiologie der Sinnesorgane, 1891, II., S. 164-179.

The writer, therefore, undertook to find out if such movements actually are made.  The observations were made by watching the eyes of several subjects, who looked repeatedly from one fixation-point to another.  Although sometimes such backward movements seemed indeed to be made, they were very rare and always very slight.  Inasmuch as the ‘false’ streak is often one third as long as the distance moved through, a movement of rebound, such as Cornelius means, would have to be one third of the arc intended, and could therefore easily have been noticed.  Furthermore, the researches of Lamansky,[12] Guillery,[13] Huey,[14] Dodge and Cline,[15] which are particularly concerned with the movements of the eyes, make no mention of such rebounds.  Schwarz[16] above all has made careful investigations on this very point, in which a screen was so placed between the observer and the luminous spot that it intervened between the pupil and the light, just before the end of the movement.  Thus the retina was not stimulated during the latter part of its movement, just when Cornelius assumed the rebound to take place.  This arrangement, however, did not in the least modify the appearance of the false streak.

   [12] Lamansky, S., Pflueger’s Archiv f. d. gesammte
   Physiologie, 1869, II., S. 418.

   [13] Guillery, ibid., 1898, LXXI., S. 607; and 1898, LXXIII.,
   S. 87.

   [14] Huey, Edmund B., American Journal of Psychology, 1900,
   XI., p. 283.

   [15] Dodge, Raymond, and Cline, T.S., PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW,
   1901, VIII., PP. 145-157.

   [16] Schwarz, Otto, Zeitschrift J. Psychologie u.  Physiologie
   der Sinnesorgane, 1892, III., S. 398-404.