Discussion of the Paper

T J. HIS is a good paper, with important data well-organized and systematically handled. My comments should not be interpreted as disparaging or in any way detracting from this judgement. I will say nothing about the ego organization index because it is a brave attempt and no one should wish to discourage courage. My first criticism refers to the hypothesis being tested, which in the Introduction of the paper refers to the experimental situation as "containing the elements of uncertainty, social isolation, low sensory input and restraint from active movement." Only one of these four is sensory deprivation per se, though two others, namely, social isolation and restraint from active movement, are almost invariably associated with sensory deprivation. Naturally, if we are studying sensory deprivation, we would like to study it apart from other contaminating variables. In our laboratory at Boston City Hospital we have recently been running experiments that attempt to focus on sensory deprivation by separating it from social isolation and immobilization, and we find the task VOL. XXIII, NO. 1, 1961 Discussion of Paper