Comments on: Projective Tests: What do you see?

By: Dr Y

Dr Y — Thu, 24 May 2012 13:02:42 +0000

I agree with Dr X. Once one has scored a Rorschach using Exner’s method, one has to agree that it is a valuable psychometric instrument. What I am amazed at is how bias UK practitioners and universities are against projective testing and do not teach it in post graduate psychology doctoral programs. These tests are used widely around the world because they have significant and valid results that help us in our understanding of an individual. Because such tests use the patients own perception they do not fit into standard British Empiricism expectations and are unjustifiably excluded in psychometric assessment – but only in the UK. Doesn’t anyone else think this is odd.

By: Dr X

Dr X — Thu, 17 Nov 2011 15:38:42 +0000

“Is there even one person here who has actually read Exner and reviewed the research?”

Yes, I have. I’m not sure why it’s the case, but an extraordinary number of people in the field are unacquainted with the extensive research-based standardization of Rorschach administration, scoring and interpretation. Psychologist blogger John Grohol also did a review of the test some time back. As I remember it, he approached the subject as a doubter and was quite surprised when he actually dug into the research. That similar to my early experience in graduate school when I’d initially assumed that the Rorschach had little research support. Then I encountered Exner and continued from there. It changed everything. I wouldn’t dream of doing a complete eval without including a Rorschach. I also studied Rorschach with Ann Beck along the way, which only deepened my appreciation, for the art along with the science of using the Rorschach.

One thing the Rorschach can be helpful with is that faking good is very common in the use of objectives in certain settings. Faking good on a Rorschach is like attempting to fake good on a Calculus exam. If you’re not able to do it, you can’t fake it. With objectives, you can be so defensive or lie, invalidating the results. On the Rorschach faking good simply isn’t possible. This becomes obvious only when you understand how the Rorschach is actually scored and interpreted.

By: London Counselling

London Counselling — Tue, 06 Sep 2011 14:58:35 +0000

Whatever you see from your sight that does not conclude what you really are after seeing the vision you have had. I believe that not all the tests give such definition to whoever you are. Tests are sometimes, just tests for assessment but is not the total fact about you.

By: Michael Wade, PhD

Michael Wade, PhD — Sat, 03 Jul 2010 12:59:06 +0000

Is there even one person here who has actually read Exner and reviewed the research? Apparently not. When examiners are properly trained, there is very good inter-rater scoring reliability and good validity if one understands the instrument and the research.

By: Kelley Sitz

Kelley Sitz — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 03:54:14 +0000

Second picture to me looks like you hairy trolls with hats clapping hands, …….just for entertainment purposes :)

By: Basuki Hardjo

Basuki Hardjo — Mon, 11 May 2009 10:16:26 +0000

pProjective Tests are very speculative.

By: Liam - Titanic Divx

Liam - Titanic Divx — Mon, 11 May 2009 09:49:29 +0000

You know what? in this picture there is nothing this secial, but still when colorized it looks relly great! It so cool to make something worthy just out of nothing! it’s a real art! great, i like it!

By: Vlad Dolezal

Vlad Dolezal — Tue, 24 Feb 2009 13:47:01 +0000

@psych student:
Well, I haven’t seen any research into this, so I can’t say if the tests are any good.

But if I wanted to get some insight into a person’s personality, I’m pretty sure I could do a lot of better things than letting them tell me what they see in some ink blots.

It might work as a conversation starter though… (“Hey, see this red-wine stain on the tablecloth I just made? What do you see in it? … Oh, you see that I’m a dick who doesn’t know how to behave in a restaurant?”). Gotta try it sometime :p

By: psych student

psych student — Mon, 23 Feb 2009 13:18:02 +0000

Vlad:
No, I see two sumo wrestlers squaring up to fight… but tomorrow, if you asked me, I might see something else. I don’t think these tests have any real value, other than as a starting point for conversations.

By: Vlad Dolezal

Vlad Dolezal — Sat, 21 Feb 2009 22:43:07 +0000

Anybody else see two dancing elephants in the second picture? :p

By: SUNITA R JAIN

SUNITA R JAIN — Sun, 28 Dec 2008 08:27:02 +0000

agree with u but it still depends on indiviual 2 individual

By: Jamie Davies

Jamie Davies — Fri, 28 Nov 2008 18:32:55 +0000

I agree completely – I don’t think that any ‘projective’ test can really be classified in the same league as psychometric testing. I have massive issues about the validity of such tests and the reliability across practitioners using these.

Thanks for your comments.

Jamie

By: Andreas Beer

Andreas Beer — Fri, 28 Nov 2008 17:09:59 +0000

Projective Tests are not exactly scientific psychology…

By: Six of the Best: Brand stories (wk. 42) | uBali RSSMix

Six of the Best: Brand stories (wk. 42) | uBali RSSMix — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 05:03:47 +0000

[...] the full selection of the original 10 Rorschach inkblots can now be seen. Jamie Davies explains in Projective Tests: What do you see? that these 10 inkblots were once jealously guarded so that test subjects wouldn’t have time [...]