The comparative validities of the Rorschach and MMPI: A meta-analysis.

A meta-analysis comparing "undirected" and "conceptual" MMPI studies, and conceptual Rorschach and MMPI studies, indicated the following conclusions, (a) Conceptual work more successfully validates an assessment instrument than does undirected investigation, (b) The validatory success of the "average" conceptual Rorschach study is comparable to that of similar MMPI work. This finding suggests that the former's questionable status may be based on sociocultural factors, rather than scientific ones, (c) The "average" conceptual Rorschach or MMPI study has only modest explanatory power, (d) Investigators' misuse of X2 has resulted in exaggerated effect size in many instances where the statistic was employed. It is suggested that future research be judged on the coherence of its inference processes, the specificity of its predictions, and the amount of variance it explains. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Criterion-based training for Rorschach scoring.

This study addresses the effects of structured training on the development of Rorschach coding skills of graduate trainees and broadens the empirical base regarding student acquisition of these coding skills. A course outline for criterion based training in Rorschach scoring is reviewed. A training approach will be described that emphasizes a progressive "vertical" or "response segment" sequence to scoring training. The effects of this structured training protocol for graduate students Rorschach coding of Exner Comprehensive System criterion-scored protocols resulted in good to excellent levels of interrater reliability. The implications of these findings for training in Rorschach coding skills are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Obituary: Samuel J. Beck (1896-1980).

Presents an obituary for Samuel J. Beck (1896-1980), whose name has been synonymous with the Rorschach Test for nearly 50 years. Beck worked tirelessly to develop the Rorschach as a scientific tool that would have some meaningfulness for all of psychology. Beck's first book, Introduction to the Rorschach Technique, in 1937 was the first monograph of the American Orthopsychiatric Association. Subsequently, his three-volume series (Rorschach's Test: Volume 1-Basic Processes; Volume 2-A Variety of Personality Pictures; and Volume 3-Advances in Interpretation) appeared between 1944 and 1952 and became standard in the field for thousands of students and practitioners. Throughout Sam Beck's long career in teaching, practice, and research he labored fruitfully to close the gap between scientific method and clinical practice by continually illustrating how the idiographic and nomothetic approaches could be neatly blended into the study and understanding of the person. Beck was an excellent teacher, a dedicated and extremely skilled Rorschacher, and a model clinician. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Rorschach and TAT indices of homosexuality in overt homosexuals, neurotics, and normal males.

Rorschach and TAT protocols of 20 male overt homosexuals, 20 male neurotics, and 20 normal male students were compared in order to determine whether proposed homosexual signs were discriminative. The homosexual group gave a significantly greater mean number of the Rorschach and TAT signs than did either nonhomosexual group. "Within the homosexual group, correlation between the number of Rorschach signs and number of TAT signs produced by each S proved significant, serving as a check on the validity of both schemes and indicating the consistency of these 2 diverse measures of homosexuality." (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Review of The clinical interaction: With special reference to the Rorschach.

Reviews the book "The clinical interaction: With special reference to the Rorschach," by Seymour B. Sarason (see record 1955-00896-000). Clinical psychologists who use the Rorschach technique have been sorely criticized by their more experimentally oriented colleagues for failing to take into account the numerous Rorschach research studies. The use of the Rorschach as a psychodiagnostic instrument still seems to be based upon the original, preexperimental statements of Rorschach and some of his disciples, with little or no attention paid to those investigations that have attempted to validate such statements. Sarason's effort to handle this problem of integrating research findings with the clinical use of the Rorschach will help answer these criticisms and will bring the Rorschach closer to the main body of contemporary empirical psychology. The author's pro-Rorschach bias occasionally leads him to conclusions that others might find unacceptable. This bias is clearly seen in the treatment of the Rorschach indices of performance under stress. Despite the criticisms, the present volume represents a significant contribution to the literature of the Rorschach and general clinical psychology. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

MALADJUSTMENT AND SOCIAL ATTAINMENT.

"Scores on the Fisher Rorschach Maladjustment Scale were plotted against a measure of social attainment developed in connection with a larger research project… Our findings indicate that within a normal group, maladjustment is significantly related to the level of social attainment and its constituent parts, such as occupation-educational level and interpersonal relations." (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The clinical utility of the Rorschach: Unfulfilled promises and an uncertain future.

The empirical evidence on the Rorschach is reviewed using three definitions of clinical utility: (a) the nature of professional attitudes and extent of clinical usage, (b) the extent of evidence for reliability, validity, diagnostic efficiency, and incremental validity, and (c) the extent of evidence that Rorschach data improve clinical decision-making and/or treatment outcome. Surveys demonstrate that the Rorschach is extensively used; however, these data are insufficient to demonstrate clinical utility as they do not address the rational, scientific, and ethical requirements of professional standards for psychological measures. After reviewing conceptual issues in Rorschach research (especially those in the Comprehensive System) the authors conclude that there is little scientific evidence to support the clinical utility of the Rorschach. Given the absence of data evaluating how the Rorschach is used in routine practice and whether its use is consistent with the manner in which it is used in research, there is currently no scientific basis for justifying the use of Rorschach scales in psychological assessments. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

"Rorschach and TAT indices of homosexuality in overt homosexuals, neurotics, and normal males": Erratum.

Reports an error in the original article by Anthony Davids, Mark Joelson, and Charles McArthur (Journal of Abnormal & Social Psychology, 1956[Sept], 53, 161-172). In the section on TAT results, under the heading of Signs suggested for further confirmation (p. 168), it states incorrectly (line 15) that the sign of a strong unresolved attachment to a father or father figure was scored in stories composed for Card 8. The sign was in fact scored in stories composed for TAT Card 7. (The following abstract of this article originally appeared in record 1958-02891-001). Rorschach and TAT protocols of 20 male overt homosexuals, 20 male neurotics, and 20 normal male students were compared in order to determine whether proposed homosexual signs were discriminative. The homosexual group gave a significantly greater mean number of the Rorschach and TAT signs than did either nonhomosexual group. "Within the homosexual group, correlation between the number of Rorschach signs and number of TAT signs produced by each S proved significant, serving as a check on the validity of both schemes and indicating the consistency of these 2 diverse measures of homosexuality." (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Personality adjustment and the study of abnormal psychology.

Rorschach story-completion test and autobiographical data were obtained from 21 students in an abnormal psychology class and 22 students in a history class, both at the beginning and the end of the semester. Comparisons of the pre- and post-test data "support the belief that, (a) as a group, students studying abnormal psychology differ in personality from those not enrolled in the course, and (b) while the study of abnormal psychology has little immediate effect on personality ad ustment, measurable changes occur which appear to be related to course experience." (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Use of the Rorschach test as a diagnostic criterion.

In his American Psychologist article, Joseph Lerner (see record 1964-01189-001) kindly ascribed to me words which properly belong to Samuel J. Beck. Beck does refer to my Perceptanalysis (Piotrowski & Lewis, 1957), but not on the same page. His words express my past belief. At present my attitude is more complex. It changed after I checked some "blind" Rorschach diagnoses and clinical psychiatric diagnoses on the same patients (Piotrowski, 1950, p. 363), and read published reviews of the reliability and validity of clinical psychiatric diagnoses. These revealed that a considerable percentage of first admission patients, discharged as psychoneurotics, are rediagnosed as schizophrenics after a re-examination several years later. In fact, some schizophrenic conditions escape detection through clinical observations for as long as 10 years, despite intermittent clinical examinations. The Rorschach test definitely is highly sensitive to schizophrenia even though at times some remitted or much improved schizophrenics produce test records failing to give any indication of the psychosis, let alone of the past acute psychotic episodes Lerner stated that "the Rorschach alone is of little assistance unless it is an integral part of the total evaluation." Well, if the Rorschach is never used as an independent diagnostic criterion, we shall never know how good or bad a diagnostic criterion it is. Using it as a part source of information, is to contaminate it (that is why "blind" diagnoses are important). The second point is: It seems advisable to follow the rule that if clinical observations or the Rorschach test--or both--suggest schizophrenia, this diagnosis is likely to be valid. This rule is compatible with Lerner's conclusion that an evaluation based on all available sources of information is better than one which utilizes only one diagnostic criterion, be it test, anamnesis, or clinical examination. To be certain that the Rorschach test is a dependable diagnostic criterion in neuropsychiatry we must have first highly reliable diagnostic test procedures. A digital computer program of Rorschach interpretation, including numerous diagnostic formulae, has been written to achieve objective and perfectly reliable application of the diagnostic test rules to individual cases. The computer program will be submitted to a stringent test of validity. We shall then be in possession of a test which will yield independent and uncontaminated diagnoses. These, in turn, will be available for use independently or as part of a "total evaluation." (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Whither the Rorschach? An analysis of the evidence.

In the previous Special Section, the authors presented empirical evidence and logical analysis that were sufficient to demonstrate that the widespread use of the Rorschach in clinical, legal, forensic, and occupational settings is unwarranted on both scientific and ethical grounds (J. Hunsley and J. M. Bailey, see record 1999-11130-004). To expand on their analysis and to respond to issues raised in the previous and current Special Sections, they begin their article by examining a number of conceptual issues that are at the heart of the disagreements about the Rorschach. The focus is then shifted to the central issue of clinical utility, with an emphasis on why current research is insufficient to demonstrate the utility of the Rorschach. Next, the psychometric issues raised by I. B. Weiner (see record 2001-05665-002) are addressed and an alternative perspective on the psychometric viability of the Rorschach is provided. Finally, the authors conclude with some suggestions for future directions that must be taken in research to address the substantive concerns raised by Rorschach critics. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Some observations on the validity of the Rorschach Inkblot Method.

Current literature reflects a persistent inclination in some quarters to denigrate the Rorschach Inkblot Method as an invalid and useless instrument for assessing personality functioning. Although perhaps warranted to some extent in years past, such harsh criticism of the Rorschach runs counter to abundant contemporary data demonstrating its psychometric soundness and practical utility. This article offers some observations concerning the kinds of information that are necessary to validate assessment instruments and provides examples of lines of research that document Rorschach validity and utility for various purposes. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

A final reply to Grove and Barden: The relevance of the Rorschach Comprehensive System for expert testimony.

In reply to Grove et al. (2002), the authors attempt to limit their focus on the question of admissibility of the Rorschach Comprehensive System for expert testimony under the guidelines of the U.S. Supreme Court Daubert/Kumho/Joiner decisions. The article refutes the argument that a "raging controversy" exists as evidence that the Rorschach is not accepted in the field of psychology. The authors again argue that Grove et al. have misconstrued the intent of Daubert/Kumho and misidentify nonclinician academics as the appropriate evaluators of the admissibility of the Rorschach. The authors add to their previous argument (2002) that the Rorschach has sufficient reliability, validity, and error rates to be admissible under Daubert and conclude by countering the Grove et al. argument that the Journal of Personality Assessment is not an adequate forum for peer review of the Rorschach. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Illusory correlation as an obstacle to the use of valid psychodiagnostic signs.

Practicing psychodiagnosticians (N = 32), when surveyed, failed to report observing Wheeler-Rorschach Signs 7 and 8 as accompanying male homosexuality although research evidence indicates that these are valid. They instead reported observing Wheeler Signs 4, 5, 16, 19, and 20, which research literature indicates are invalid. These signs were found to have much stronger rated, verbal associative connections to male homosexuality than the unpopular valid signs. 693 undergraduates (divided among 13 conditions) viewed 30 Rorschach cards on each of which was arbitrarily designated a patient's response and his 2 symptoms. The Ss "rediscovered" the same invalid Rorschach content signs of homosexuality as the clinicians reported, although these relationships were absent in the experimental materials. They did so regardless of the degree to which the clinically valid signs were valid in the contrived task materials. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Cognitive style and defenses: A longitudinal study of intellectualization and field independence.

Investigated the long-range stability of the defense style of intellectualization (assessed by ratings of Rorschach protocols), and its relation to an analytic field-independent cognitive style (assessed by scores on the Rod and Frame, RFT, test). 28 male Ss had been administered the Rorschach and the RFT at age 14, 17, and 24 (1/2 of the sample was tested at age 10) and the Wechsler-Bellevue at age 17, as part of a broader longitudinal study. Results indicate that individual differences in Rorschach ratings of intellectualization tend to remain stable from childhood to young adulthood. Intellectualization ratings were also positively related to field independence and IQ. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The hard science of Rorschach research: What do we know and where do we go?

As the final article in the Special Series on "The Utility of the Rorschach for Clinical Assessment," the authors provide an overview of this instrument's current status. They begin with a thorough review of global and focused meta-analyses, including an expanded analysis of K. C. H. Parker et al's (see record 1989-14153-001) data set, and conclude that Rorschach, MMPI, and IQ scales each produce roughly similar effect size magnitudes, although all tests have greater validity for some purposes than for others. Because this evidentiary foundation justifies addressing other issues, the authors build on contributions to the Special Series to identify 11 salient theoretical and empirical gaps in the Rorschach knowledge base and make recommendations for addressing these challenges to further the evolution of the Rorschach and document its strengths and inherent limitations. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Let's Call the Whole Thing Off: A Response to Dawes (2001).

There has been a recent controversy regarding the validity of the Rorschach test. This comment is in response to criticism levied by R. M. Dawes (2001; see record 2001-18200-013) on the incremental validity of the Ego Impairment Index (EII), a Rorschach-derived measure of cognition, perception, and reasoning. The Dawes articles (1999 and 2001) serve as an example of the recent practice of placing extraordinary challenges on the Rorschach test. Dawes's arguments are examined and parallel examples are provided that demonstrate the bias used to judge the validity of the EII, the Rorschach, and psychological assessment. Still, in the face of criticism, the results (see Dawes, 2001) support the incremental validity of the EII. Thus, the conclusion presented in this Comment is that it is time for us to "call the whole thing off" and end the Rorschach controversy that has occupied so much recent attention and generated so few new ideas. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Rorschach water percepts: A study in conflicting results.

The hypothesis that the Rorschach protocols of alcoholics are "frequently overladen with percepts of water" is considered. Early research support of the hypothesis by the author was questioned by later research. Further research data are interpreted as supporting the hypothesis. "As the situation now rests, alcoholics perceive more water in Kentucky; in Massachusetts and in Washington they do not." From Psyc Abstracts 36:02:2JK07G. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Review of Developments in the Rorschach technique.

Reviews the book, Developments in the Rorschach technique Vol. 1. Technique and theory by Mary D Ainsworth, Robert R. Holt, Bruno Klopfer, and Walter G. Klopfer (see record 1954-07533-000). There is something for everyone in this first volume of a two-volume work on the Rorschach. Probably the primary use of the book will be as a teaching manual for students learning the mechanics of scoring and the feeling for interpretation, but even experienced users of the technique may read with profit the sections on theory and interpretation. The sections on administration and scoring are written clearly and numerous examples are provided to clarify scoring problems. There is some clarification of methods of scoring shading responses though these distinctions are likely to continue to be frustrating to students. Ten popular responses are listed-the same ones as twelve years ago, and a slightly different list from that offered by other experts. The form-level rating procedure, an attempt to give a numerical score for each percept reflecting its accuracy, will continue to baffle statisticians and others with a bias against adding, subtracting, and averaging cabbages and kings. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The Rorschach: Toward a nomothetically based, idiographically applicable configurational model.

The authors argue that the Rorschach can and should be used best with a nomothetic foundation that adds an idiographic approach depending on the goal of the assessment. The research supporting this position is reviewed as are conceptual models that are advantageous to this conceptual position. The authors posit that method variance has a powerful impact on the measurement process. Each method is of value in some areas and of limited relevance in others. Self-report measures are most likely to be useful when interest is focused on consciously available and behavioral dimensions of functioning. Depth-oriented, indirect measures such as the Rorschach are most likely to be useful when interest is focused on unconscious, longitudinal, and structural dimensions of functioning. However, to have a full picture of human beings, heteromethod assessment is necessary to capture the full range of functioning and to implement the analytic model of assessment. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)