he Beck Depression Inventory (BDI, BDI-1A, BDI-II), created by Aaron T. Beck, is a 21-question multiple-choice self-report inventory, one of the most widely used instruments for measuring the severity of depression. Its development marked a shift among health care professionals, who had until then viewed depression from a psychodynamic perspective, instead of it being rooted in the patient's own thoughts.
In its current version the questionnaire is designed for individuals aged 13 and over, and is composed of items relating to symptoms of depression such as hopelessness and irritability, cognitions such as guilt or feelings of being punished, as well as physical symptoms such as fatigue, weight loss, and lack of interest in sex.[1]
There are three versions of the BDI—the original BDI, first published in 1961 and later revised in 1978 as the BDI-1A, and the BDI-II, published in 1996. The BDI is widely used as an assessment tool by health care professionals and researchers in a variety of settings.
The BDI was used as a model for the development of the Children's Depression Inventory (CDI), first published in 1979 by clinical psychologist Maria Kovacs.[2]
Contents
[hide] * 1 Development and history * 1.1 BDI * 1.2 BDI-IA * 1.3 BDI-II * 2 Two-factor approach to depression * 3 Impact * 4 Limitations * 5 See also * 6 Notes * 7 Further reading * 8 External links
-------------------------------------------------
Development and history[edit]
Historically, depression was described in psychodynamic terms as "inverted hostility against the self".[3] By contrast, the BDI was developed in a novel way for its time; by collating patients' verbatim descriptions of their symptoms and using these to structure a scale which could reflect the intensity or severity of a given symptom.[1]
Throughout his work, Beck drew attention to the importance of "negative cognitions": sustained, inaccurate, and often intrusive negative thoughts about the self.[4] In his view, it was the case that these cognitions caused depression, rather than being generated by depression.
Beck developed a triad of negative cognitions about the world, the future, and the self, which play a major role in depression. An example of the triad in action taken from Brown (1995) is the case of a student obtaining poor exam results: * The student has negative thoughts about the world, so he may come to believe he does not enjoy the class. * The student has negative thoughts about his future, because he thinks he may not pass the class. * The student has negative thoughts about his self, as he may feel he does not deserve to be in college.[5]
The development of the BDI reflects that in its structure, with items such as "I have lost all of my interest in other people" to reflect the world, "I feel discouraged about the future" to reflect the future, and "I blame myself for everything bad that happens" to reflect the self. The view of depression as sustained by intrusive negative cognitions has had particular application in cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), which aims to challenge and neutralize them through techniques such as cognitive restructuring.
BDI[edit]
The original BDI, first published in 1961,[6] consisted of twenty-one questions about how the subject has been feeling in the last week. Each question has a set of at least four possible answer choices, ranging in intensity. For example: * (0) I do not feel sad. * (1) I feel sad. * (2) I am sad all the time and I can't snap out of it. * (3) I am so sad or unhappy that I can't stand it.
When the test is scored, a value of 0 to 3 is assigned for each answer and then the total score is compared to a key to determine the depression's severity. The standard cut-offs are as follows:[7] * 0–9: indicates minimal depression * 10–18: indicates mild depression * 19–29: indicates moderate depression * 30–63: indicates severe depression.
Higher total scores indicate more severe depressive symptoms.
Some items on the BDI have more than one statement marked with the same score. For instance, there are two responses under the Mood heading that score a 2: (2a) I am blue or sad all the time and I can't snap out of it and (2b) I am so sad or unhappy that it is very painful.[1]
BDI-IA[edit]
The BDI-IA was a revision of the original instrument, developed by Beck during the 1970s and copyrighted in 1978. To improve ease of use, the "a and b statements" described above were removed, and respondents were instructed to endorse how they had been feeling during the preceding two weeks.[8][9] The internal consistency for the BDI-IA was good, with a Cronbach's alpha coefficient of around 0.85, meaning that the items on the inventory are highly correlated with each other.[10]
However, this version retained some flaws; the BDI-IA only addressed six out of the nine DSM-III criteria for depression. This and other criticisms were addressed in the BDI-II.
BDI-II[edit]
The BDI-II was a 1996 revision of the BDI,[9] developed in response to the American Psychiatric Association's publication of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, which changed many of the diagnostic criteria for Major Depressive Disorder.
Items involving changes in body image, hypochondria, and difficulty working were replaced. Also, sleep loss and appetite loss items were revised to assess both increases and decreases in sleep and appetite. All but three of the items were reworded; only the items dealing with feelings of being punished, thoughts about suicide, and interest in sex remained the same. Finally, participants were asked to rate how they have been feeling for the past two weeks, as opposed to the past week as in the original BDI.
Like the BDI, the BDI-II also contains 21 questions, each answer being scored on a scale value of 0 to 3. Higher total scores indicate more severe depressive symptoms. The standardized cutoffs used differ from the original: * 0–13: minimal depression * 14–19: mild depression * 20–28: moderate depression * 29–63: severe depression.
One measure of an instrument's usefulness is to see how closely it agrees with another similar instrument that has been validated against clinical interview by a trained clinician. In this respect, the BDI-II is positively correlated with the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale with a Pearson r of 0.71, showing good agreement. The test was also shown to have a high one-week test–retest reliability (Pearson r =0.93), suggesting that it was not overly sensitive to daily variations in mood.[11] The test also has high internal consistency (α=.91).[9]
-------------------------------------------------
Two-factor approach to depression[edit] | This section's factual accuracy is disputed. (June 2014) |
Depression can be thought of as having two components: the affective component (e.g. mood) and the physical or "somatic" component (e.g. loss of appetite). The BDI-II reflects this and can be separated into two subscales. The purpose of the subscales is to help determine the primary cause of a patient's depression.
The affective subscale contains eight items: pessimism, past failures, guilty feelings, punishment feelings, self-dislike, self-criticalness, suicidal thoughts or wishes, and worthlessness. The somatic subscale consists of the other thirteen items: sadness, loss of pleasure, crying, agitation, loss of interest, indecisiveness, loss of energy, change in sleep patterns, irritability, change in appetite, concentration difficulties, tiredness and/or fatigue, and loss of interest in sex. The two subscales were moderately correlated at 0.57, suggesting that the physical and psychological aspects of depression are related rather than totally distinct.[12][13]
-------------------------------------------------
Impact[edit]
The development of the BDI was an important event in psychiatry and psychology; it represented a shift in health care professionals' view of depression from a Freudian, psychodynamic perspective, to one guided by the patient's own thoughts or "cognitions".[3] It also established the principle that instead of attempting to develop a psychometric tool based on a possibly invalid theory, self-report questionnaires when analysed using techniques such as factor analysis can suggest theoretical constructs.
The BDI was originally developed to provide a quantitative assessment of the intensity of depression. Because it is designed to reflect the depth of depression, it can monitor changes over time and provide an objective measure for judging improvement and the effectiveness or otherwise of treatment methods.[14] The instrument remains widely used in research; in 1998, it had been used in over 2000 empirical studies.[15] It has been translated into multiple European languages as well as Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Persian,[16]and Xhosa.[17]
-------------------------------------------------
Limitations[edit]
The BDI suffers from the same problems as other self-report inventories, in that scores can be easily exaggerated or minimized by the person completing them. Like all questionnaires, the way the instrument is administered can have an effect on the final score. If a patient is asked to fill out the form in front of other people in a clinical environment, for instance, social expectations have been shown to elicit a different response compared to administration via a postal survey.[18]
In participants with concomitant physical illness the BDI's reliance on physical symptoms such as fatigue may artificially inflate scores due to symptoms of the illness, rather than of depression.[19] In an effort to deal with this concern Beck and his colleagues developed the "Beck Depression Inventory for Primary Care" (BDI-PC), a short screening scale consisting of seven items from the BDI-II considered to be independent of physical function. Unlike the standard BDI, the BDI-PC produces only a binary outcome of "not depressed" or "depressed" for patients above a cutoff score of 4.[20]
Although designed as a screening device rather than a diagnostic tool, the BDI is sometimes used by health care providers to reach a quick diagnosis.[21]
The BDI is copyrighted, a fee must be paid for each copy used, and photocopying it is a violation of copyright. There is no evidence that the BDI-II is more valid or reliable than other depression scales,[22] and public domain scales such as the Patient Health Questionnaire – Nine Item (PHQ-9) has been studied as a useful tool.[23]
-------------------------------------------------
See also[edit]
The Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) is a series of questions developed to measure the intensity, severity, and depth of depression in patients with psychiatric diagnoses. Its long form is composed of 21 questions, each designed to assess a specific symptom common among people with depression. A shorter form is composed of seven questions and is designed for administration by primary care providers. Aaron T. Beck, a pioneer in cognitive therapy, first designed the BDI.
Purpose
The BDI was originally developed to detect, assess, and monitor changes in depressive symptoms among people in a mental health care setting. It is also used to detect depressive symptoms in a primary care setting. The BDI usually takes between five and ten minutes to complete as part of a psychological or medical examination.
Precautions

Read more: http://www.minddisorders.com/A-Br/Beck-Depression-Inventory.html#ixzz3qHqWF6Ww

Beck Scale Scoring Ranges

BECK DEPRESSION INVENTORY – II

Score Range
0-13 Minimal
14-19 Mild 20-28 Moderate 29-63 Severe

BECK ANXIETY INVENTORY

Score Range 0-9 Minimal 10-16 Mild 17-29 Moderate 30-63 Severe

BECK HOPELESSNESS SCALE

Score Range 0-3 Minimal 4-8 Mild 9-14 Moderate
15-20 Severe

PBQ (Personal Belief Questionnaire) sub categories for personality types (DSM IV)

Questions Personality

1-14 Avoidant
15-28 Dependent
29-42 Passive-Aggressive
43-56 Obsessive-Compulsive
57-70 Anti-Social
71-84 Narcisstic
85-98 Histrionic
99-112 Schizoid
113-126 Paranoid Borderline
2,4,9,13,15,16,27,60,97,113,116,125,126

INTERPRETING THE BECK DEPRESSION INVENTORY (BDI-II)
Add up the score for each of the 21 questions by counting the number to the right of each question you marked. The highest possible total for the whole test would be sixty-three and the lowest possible score for the test would be zero. This would mean you circles zero on each question. You can evaluate your depression according to the Table below.
Total Score Levels of Depression
0-10 = These ups and downs are considered normal
11-16 = Mild mood disturbance
17-20 = Borderline clinical depression
21-30 = Moderate depression
31-40 = Severe depression over 40 = Extreme depression
A PERSISTENT SCORE OF 17 OR ABOVE INDICATES THAT YOU MAY NEED TREATMENT.
___________________________________________________________________________
INTERPRETING THE BECK ANXIETY INVENTORY (BAI)
Scoring Key
Not At All = 0
Mildly = 1
Moderately = 2
Severely = 3
Add up the score for each of the 21 questions by using the scoring key above. The highest possible total for the whole test would be sixty-three. Since the lowest possible score for each question is zero, the lowest possible score for the test would be zero. This would mean you circles zero on each question. You can evaluate your anxiety according to the Table below which is based on the 1993 revisions.
Total Score Levels of Anxiety
0-7 = Minimal level of anxiety
8-15 = Mild anxiety
16-25 = Moderate anxiety
26-63 = Severe depression
INTERPRETING THE BECK SCALE FOR SUICIDE (BSS)
If the client responses with a 0 (0= no desire) to items 4 and 5 then skip ahead to items 20 and 21. The client does not need to complete items 6 through 17.
If the client responses with a 1 or 2 to items 4 and 5 then you would instruct them to complete all the items on the scale. When they complete the scale you would add up the score for each of the first 19 questions by counting the number to the right of each question you marked. Items 20 and 21 are not part of the total scale score. They are provided to help gather additional clinical information for the therapist. The manual contains general cutoff guidelines, although the author recommends that cut-off scores should be based upon clinical decisions. Generally scores above 24 are considered to be a clinical cutoff implying this client is at a significant risk for suicide.
________________________________________________________________
INTERPRETING THE BECK HOPELESSNESS SCALE (BHS)
Scoring Template Count one point if any of the items were answered with the following responses: 1. | FALSE | 6. | FALSE | 11. | TRUE | 16. | TRUE | 2. | TRUE | 7. | TRUE | 12. | TRUE | 17. | TRUE | 3. | FALSE | 8. | FALSE | 13. | FALSE | 18. | TRUE | 4. | TRUE | 9. | TRUE | 14. | TRUE | 19. | FALSE | 5. | FALSE | 10. | FALSE | 15. | FALSE | 20. | TRUE |

Global Deterioration Scale
Some health-care professionals use the Global Deterioration Scale, also called the Reisberg Scale, to measure the progression of Alzheimer's disease. This scale divides Alzheimer's disease into seven stages of ability.
Stage 1: No cognitive decline * Experiences no problems in daily living.
Stage 2: Very mild cognitive decline * Forgets names and locations of objects. * May have trouble finding words.
Stage 3: Mild cognitive decline * Has difficulty travelling to new locations. * Has difficulty handling problems at work.
Stage 4: Moderate cognitive decline * Has difficulty with complex tasks (finances, shopping, planning dinner for guests).
Stage 5: Moderately severe cognitive decline * Needs help to choose clothing. * Needs prompting to bathe.
Stage 6: Severe cognitive decline * Loss of awareness of recent events and experiences. * Requires assistance bathing; may have a fear of bathing. * Has decreased ability to use the toilet or is incontinent.
Stage 7: Very severe cognitive decline * Vocabulary becomes limited, eventually declining to single words. * Loses ability to walk and sit. * Requires help with eating.
GLOBAL DETERIORATION SCALE (GDS) (Choose the most appropriate global stage based upon cognition and function, and CHECK ONLY ONE.) 1. No subjective complaints of memory deficit. No memory deficit evident on clinical interview. 2. Subjective complaints of memory deficit, most frequently in following areas: (a) forgetting where one has placed familiar objects; (b) forgetting names one formerly knew well.
No objective evidence of memory deficit on clinical interview.
No objective deficit in employment or social situations.
Appropriate concern with respect to symptomatology. 3. Earliest clear-cut deficits.
Manifestations in more than one of the following areas:
(a) patient may have gotten lost when traveling to an unfamiliar location.
(b) co-workers become aware of patient's relatively poor performance.
(c) word and/or name finding deficit become evident to intimates.
(d) patient may read a passage or book and retain relatively little material.
(e) patient may demonstrate decreased facility remembering names upon introduction to new people.
(f) patient may have lost or misplaced an object of value.
(g) concentration deficit may be evident on clinical testing.
Objective evidence of memory deficit obtained only with an intensive interview.
Decreased performance in demanding employment and social settings.
Denial begins to become manifest in patient.
Mild to moderate anxiety frequently accompanies symptoms. 4. Clear-cut deficit on careful clinical interview.
Deficit manifest in following areas:
(a) decreased knowledge of current and recent events.
(b) may exhibit some deficit in memory of one's personal history.
(c) concentration deficit elicited on serial subtractions.
(d) decreased ability to travel, handle finances, etc.
Frequently no deficit in following areas:
(a) orientation to time and place.
(b) recognition of familiar persons and faces.
(c) ability to travel to familiar locations.
Inability to perform complex tasks.
Denial is dominant defense mechanism.
Flattening of affect and withdrawal from challenging situations. 2 5. Patient can no longer survive without some assistance.
Patient is unable during interview to recall a major relevant aspect of their current life, e.g.:
(a) their address or telephone number of many years.
(b) the names of close members of their family (such as grandchildren). (c) the name of the high school or college from which they graduated. Frequently some disorientation to time (date, day of the week, season, etc.) or to place.
An educated person may have difficulty counting back from 40 by 4s or from 20 by 2s.
Persons at this stage retain knowledge of many major facts regarding themselves and others.
They invariably know their own names and generally know their spouse's and children's names. They require no assistance with toileting or eating, but may have difficulty choosing the proper clothing to wear. 6. May occasionally forget the name of the spouse upon whom they are entirely dependent for survival.
Will be largely unaware of all recent events and experiences in their lives.
Retain some knowledge of their surroundings; the year, the season, etc.
May have difficulty counting by 1s from 10, both backward and sometimes forward.
Will require some assistance with activities of daily living:
(a) may become incontinent.
(b) will require travel assistance but occasionally will be able to travel to familiar locations.
Diurnal rhythm frequently disturbed.
Almost always recall their own name.
Frequently continue to be able to distinguish familiar from unfamiliar persons in their environment. Personality and emotional changes occur. These are quite variable and include:
(a) delusional behavior, e.g., patients may accuse their spouse of being an imposter; may talk to imaginary figures in the environment, or to their own reflection in the mirror.
(b) obsessive symptoms, e.g., person may continually repeat simple cleaning activities.
(c) anxiety symptoms, agitation, and even previously non-existent violent behavior may occur.
(d) cognitive abulia, e.g., loss of willpower because an individual cannot carry a thought long enough to determine a purposeful course of action. 7. All verbal abilities are lost over the course of this stage.
Early in this stage words and phrases are spoken but speech is very circumscribed.
Later there is no serviceable speech at all - only unintelligible utterances with rare emergence of seemingly forgotten words and phrases.
Incontinent; requires assistance toileting and feeding.
Basic psychomotor skills (e.g. ability to walk) are lost with the progression of this stage.
The brain appears to no longer be able to tell the body what to do.
Generalized rigidity and developmental neurologic reflexes are frequently present.
The Global Deterioration Scale for Assessment of Primary Degenerative Dementia
The Global Deterioration Scale (GDS), developed by Dr. Barry Reisberg, provides caregivers an overview of the stages of cognitive function for those suffering from a primary degenerative dementia such as Alzheimer's disease. It is broken down into 7 different stages. Stages 1-3 are the pre-dementia stages. Stages 4-7 are the dementia stages.
Biginning in stage 5, an individual can no longer survive without assistance. Within the GDS, each stage is numbered (1-7), given a short title (i.e., Forgetfulness, Early Confusional, etc. followed by a brief listing of the characteristics for that stage. Caregivers can get a rough idea of where an individual is at in the disease process by observing that individual's behavioral characteristics and comparing them to the GDS. For more specific assessments, use the accompanying Brief Cognitive Rating Scale (BCRS) and the Functional Assessment Staging
(FAST) measures.
Level Clinical Characteristics
1
No cognitive decline No subjective complaints of memory deficit. No memory deficit evident on clinical interview.
2
Very mild cognitive decline (Age Associated
Memory Impairment)
Subjective complaints of memory deficit, most frequently in following areas: (a) forgetting where one has placed familiar objects; (b) forgetting names one formerly knew well. No objective evidence of memory deficit on clinical interview. No objective deficits in employment or social situations. Appropriate concern with respect to symptomatology.
3
Mild cognitive decline (Mild Cognitive
Impairment)
Earliest clear-cut deficits. Manifestations in more than one of the following areas:
(a) patient may have gotten lost when traveling to an unfamiliar location; (b) coworkers become aware of patient's relatively poor performance; (c) word and name finding deficit becomes evident to intimates; (d) patient may read a passage or a book and retain relatively little material; (e) patient may demonstrate decreased facility in remembering names upon introduction to new people; (f) patient may have lost or misplaced an object of value; (g) concentration deficit may be evident on clinical testing. Objective evidence of memory deficit obtained only with an intensive interview. Decreased performance in demanding employment and social settings. Denial begins to become manifest in patient.
Mild to moderate anxiety accompanies symptoms.
4
Moderate cognitive decline (Mild Dementia)
Clear-cut deficit on careful clinical interview. Deficit manifest in following areas:
(a) decreased knowledge of current and recent events; (b) may exhibit some deficit in memory of ones personal history; (c) concentration deficit elicited on serial subtractions; (d) decreased ability to travel, handle finances, etc. Frequently no deficit in following areas: (a) orientation to time and place; (b) recognition of familiar persons and faces; (c) ability to travel to familiar locations. Inability to perform complex tasks. Denial is dominant defense mechanism. Flattening of affect and withdrawal from challenging situations frequently occur.
Page 1 of 2 5
Moderately severe cognitive decline
(Moderate Dementia)
Patient can no longer survive without some assistance. Patient is unable during interview to recall a major relevant aspect of their current lives, e.g., an address or telephone number of many years, the names of close family members (such as grandchildren), the name of the high school or college from which they graduated. Frequently some disorientation to time (date, day of week, season, etc.) or to place. An educated person may have difficulty counting back from 40 by 4s or from 20 by 2s. Persons at this stage retain knowledge of many major facts regarding themselves and others. They invariably know their own names and generally know their spouses' and children's names. They require no assistance with toileting and eating, but may have some difficulty choosing the proper clothing to wear.
6
Severe cognitive decline
(Moderately Severe
Dementia)
May occasionally forget the name of the spouse upon whom they are entirely dependent for survival. Will be largely unaware of all recent events and experiences in their lives. Retain some knowledge of their past lives but this is very sketchy. Generally unaware of their surroundings, the year, the season, etc.
May have difficulty counting from 10, both backward and, sometimes, forward.
Will require some assistance with activities of daily living, e.g., may become incontinent, will require travel assistance but occasionally will be able to travel to familiar locations. Diurnal rhythm frequently disturbed. Almost always recall their own name. Frequently continue to be able to distinguish familiar from unfamiliar persons in their environment. Personality and emotional changes occur. These are quite variable and include: (a) delusional behavior, e.g., patients may accuse their spouse of being an impostor, may talk to imaginary figures in the environment, or to their own reflection in the mirror; (b) obsessive symptoms,
e.g., person may continually repeat simple cleaning activities; (c) anxiety symptoms, agitation, and even previously nonexistent violent behavior may occur; (d) cognitive abulla, i.e., loss of willpower because an individual cannot carry a thought long enough to determine a purposeful course of action.
7
Very severe cognitive decline (Severe Dementia)
All verbal abilities are lost over the course of this stage. Frequently there is no speech at all -only unintelligible utterances and rare emergence of seemingly forgotten words and phrases. Incontinent of urine, requires assistance toileting and feeding. Basic psychomotor skills, e.g., ability to walk, are lost with the progression of this stage. The brain appears to no longer be able to tell the body what to do. Generalized rigidity and developmental neurologic reflexes are frequently present.
Reisberg, B., Ferris, S.H., de Leon, M.J., and Crook, T. The global deterioration scale for assessment of primary degenerative dementia. American Journal of Psychiatry, 1982, 139: 1136-1139.
Copyright © 1983 by Barry Reisberg, M.D. Reproduced with permission.
Page 2
Draw a personThe Draw-a-Person test (DAP, DAP test, or Goodenough–Harris Draw-a-Person test) is a psychological projective personality or cognitive test used to evaluate children and adolescents for a variety of purposes.
A test used to measure nonverbal intelligence or to screen for emotional or behavior disorders.
Based on children's drawings of human figures, this test can be used with two different scoring systems for different purposes. One measures nonverbal intelligence while the other screens for emotional or behavioral disorders. During the testing session, which can be completed in 15 minutes, the child is asked to draw three figures—a man, a woman, and him- or herself. To evaluate intelligence, the test administrator uses the Draw-a-Person: QSS (Quantitative Scoring System). This system analyzes fourteen different aspects of the drawings, such as specific body parts and clothing, for various criteria, including presence or absence, detail, and proportion. In all, there are 64 scoring items for each drawing. A separate standard score is recorded for each drawing, and a total score for all three. The use of a nonverbal, nonthreatening task to evaluate intelligence is intended to eliminate possible sources of bias by reducing variables like primary language, verbal skills, communication disabilities, and sensitivity to working under pressure. However, test results can be influenced by previous drawing experience, a factor that may account for the tendency of middle-class children to score higher on this test than lower-class children, who often have fewer opportunities to draw. To assess the test-taker for emotional problems, the administrator uses the Draw-a-Person: SPED (Screening Procedure for Emotional Disturbance) to score the drawings. This system is composed of two types of criteria. For the first type, eight dimensions of each drawing are evaluated against norms for the child's age group. For the second type, 47 different items are considered for each drawing.
See also Intelligence

Read more: Draw-a-Person Test - Drawing, Intelligence, Score, and Emotional - JRank Articles http://psychology.jrank.org/pages/193/Draw-Person-Test.html#ixzz3qHoLjs9M 1. DRAW A PERSON TEST 2. 2. DAP DAP Test Goodenough- Harris Draw A Person Test 3. 3. WHAT IS DAP TEST? IT IS A PSYCHOLOGICAL PROJECTIVE PERSONALITY AND COGNITIVE TEST USED TO EVALUATE CHILDREN AND ADOLESCENTS FOR A VARIETY OF PURPOSES. IT IS A TEST WHERE THE SUBJECT IS ASKED TO DRAW A PICTURE OF A MAN, A WOMAN, AND THEMSELVES. NO FURTHER INSTRUCTIONS ARE GIVEN AND THE PICTURES ARE ANALYZED ON A NUMBER OF DIMENSIONS. A TEST USED TO MEASURE NON VERBAL INTELLIGENCE OR TO SCREEN EMOTIONAL OR BEHAVIORAL DISORDERS. 4. 4. HISTORY 5. 5. HISTORY THIS TEST WAS ORIGINALLY DEVELOPED BY FLORENCE GOODENOUGH IN 1926, THIS TEST WAS FIRST KNOWN AS THE GOODENOUGH DRAW- A- MAN TEST. GOODENOUGH FIRST BECAME INTERESTED IN FIGURE DRAWING WHEN SHE WANTED TO FIND A WAY TO SUPPLEMENT THE STANFORD- BINET INTELLIGENCE TEST WITH A NON- VERBAL MEASURE. 6. 6. HISTORY THIS TEST WAS DEVELOPED TO ASSESS MATURITY IN YOUNG PEOPLE. SHE CONCLUDED THAT THE AMOUNT OF DETAIL INVOLVED IN A CHILD’S DRAWING COULD BE USED AS AN EFFECTIVE TOOL. THIS LED TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE FIRST OFFICIAL ASSESSMENT USING FIGURE DRAWING, THE DRAW- A- MAN TEST. 7. 7. HISTORY OVER THE YEARS, THE TEST HAS BEEN REVISED MANY TIMES WITH ADDED MEASURES FOR ASSESING INTELLIGENCE. HARRIS LATER REVISED THE TEST INCLUDING DRAWINGS OF A WOMAN, AND OF THEMSELVES. NOW CONSIDERED AS THE GOODENOUGH- HARRIS TEST. 8. 8. HISTORY IN 1949, KAREN MACHOVER DEVELOPED THE FIRST MEASURE OF FIGURE DRAWING AS A PERSONALITY ASSESSMENT WITH THE DRAW- A PERSON TEST. MACHOVER DID A LOT OF WORK WITH DISTURBED ADOLESCENTS AND ADULTS AND USED THE TEST TO ASSESS PEOPLE OF ALL AGES. SHE MEASURE EXPRESSING THAT THE FEATURES OF THE FIGURES DRAWN, REFLECT UNDERLYING ATTITUDES, CONCERNS, AND PERSONALITY TRAITS. 9. 9. HISTORY MACHOVER USED A QUALITATIVE APPROACH IN HER INTERPRETATION CONSIDERING INDIVIDUAL DRAWING CHARACTERISTICS. BUT OTHERS HAVE SUGGESTED A MORE QUANTITATIVE APPROACH THAT CAN BE MORE WIDELY USED ANALYZING SELECTED CHARACTERISTICS THAT ARE IN AN INDEX OF DEEPER MEANINGS. SOON AFTER THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TEST, PSYCHOLOGISTS STARTED CONSIDERING THE TEST FOR MEASURES OF DIFFERENCESS IN PERSONALITY AS WELL AS INTELLIGENCE. 10. 10. HISTORY THE MOST POPULAR QUANTITATIVE APPROACH WAS DEVELOPED BY ELIZABETH KOPPITZ. SHE DEVELOPED A MEASURE OF ASSESMENT THAT HAS A LIST OF EMOTIONAL INDICATORS INCLUDING SIZE OF FIGURES, OMISSION OF BODY PARTS AND SOME ADDITIONAL “SPECIAL FEATURES”. THE TOTAL NUMBER OF THE INDICATORS ARE SIMPLY ADDED UP TO PROVIDE A NUMBER THAT REPRESENTS THE LIKENESS OF THE DISTURBANCE. 11. 11. ADVANTAGES 12. 12. ADVANTAGES EASY TO ADMINISTER NO STRICT FORMATS RELATIVELY CULTURE FREE CAN ASSESS PEOPLE WITH COMMUNICATION PROBLEMS. 13. 13. DISADVANTAGES 14. 14. DISADVANTAGES RESTRICTED AMOUNT OF HYPOTHESIS CAN BE DEVELOPED. RELATIVELY NON- VERBAL BUT, MAY HAVE SOME PROBLEMS DURING INQUIRY. 15. 15. ANALYSIS 16. 16. ANALYSIS (MACHOVER) HEAD: THE HEAD IS THE CENTER FOR INTELLECTUAL POWER, SOCIAL BALANCE, AND CONTROL OVER IMPULSES. A DISPROPORTIONATE HEAD SUGGESTS THAT THE SUBJECT IS HAVING DIFFICULTY IN ONE OF THESE AREAS. DISPROPORTIONATE HEAD CAN ALSO BE DRAWN BY SOMEONE WHO HAS BRAIN DAMAGE, SEVERE HEADACHES, OR OTHER SENSITIVITY OF THE HEAD. LARGE HEAD- PARANOID, NARCISSISTIC, INTELLECTUALLY RIGHTEOUS, OR VAIN, ANYTHING HAVING TO DO WITH A LARGE EGO. 17. 17. ANALYSIS (MACHOVER) TIMING- PEOPLE WHO DRAW IT LAST SHOWS DISTURBANCES WITH INTERPERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS. NECK- THE NECK OFTEN REPRESENTS THE CONNECTION BETWEEN THE HEAD AND THE BODY AN UNDEREMPHASIS MAY REPRESENT ONE FEELING A DISCONNECTION BETWEEN THESE TWO THINGS AND COULD SUGGEST: SCHIZOPHRENIA. HOWEVER, UNDEREMPHASIS COULD ALSO SUGGESTS FEELINGS OF PHYSICAL INADEQUACY. 18. 18. ANALYSIS (MACHOVER) FACE OMITTING: OMISSION OF FACIAL FEATURES IS AN EXPRESSION OF AVOIDANCE OF SOCIAL PROBLEMS. EYES: REVEALS INNER IMAGE OF THE SELF. EMPHASIS: SUSPICIOUS OF THE OUTSIDE WORLD. DETAIL: CONCERN WITH SOCIAL FUNCTIONS; A MALE WHO DRAWS EYELASHES SHOWS HOMOSEXUAL TENDENCIES. EYES CLOSED/ NO PUPIL: EMOTIONALLY IMMATURE OR PEOPLE WHO WANT TO SHUT OUT THE WORLD. PIERCING EYES: PARANOID SCHIZOPHRENIC EYEBROW: AN EMPHASIS ON GOOD OR BAD GROOMING. 19. 19. ANALYSIS (MACHOVER) NOSE: SEXUAL SYMBOL; EMPHASIS INDICATES SEXUAL DIFFICULTY, SEXUAL IMMATURITY, INFERIORITY OR OTHER SEXUAL INSUFICIENCIES CHIN: IF IT IS NOT INCLUDED, IT MAY BE A WAY OF COMPENSATING FOR WEAKNESS, INDECISION, OR A FEAR OF RESPONSIBILITY; IT CAN BE INTERPRETED AS HAVING A STRONG DRIVE TO BE SOCIALLY FORCEFUL AND DOMINANT. LIPS: GIRLS WHO DRAW CUPID- BOW LIPS ARE CONSIDERED SEXUALLY PRECOCIOUS. FULL LIPS ON A MALE REPRESENTS NARCISSISM. PEOPLE WHO DRAW SOMETHING IN THE MOUTH INDICATES ORAL EROTIC TRENDS.. 20. 20. ANALYSIS (MACHOVER) MOUTH: MOST OFTEN DISTORTED IN PEOPLE WITH SEXUAL DIFFICULTIES OVER EMPHASIS- EMPHASIZED IMPORTACE OF FOOD, PROFANE LANGUAGE, AND TEMPER TANTRUMS. TEETH: SIGN OF AGGRESSION. CLOSED MOUTH: SHUTTING THE MOUTH AGAINST SOMETHING, WANTING TO KEEP SOMETHING IN, ESPECIALLY A HOMOSEXUAL EXPERIENCE WIDE GRINNING MOUTH- SEEKS APPROVAL. 21. 21. ANALYSIS (MACHOVER) HAIR: MESSY HAIR MAY REPRESENT A FEELING OF IMMORTALITY WHILE MORE WAVY AND GLAMOROUS HAIR CAN MEAN A PERSON IS SEXUALLY IMMATURE. CONTACT FEATURES LIKE LEGS, ARMS, FEET AND HANDS: THE MOVEMENT OF CONTACT FEATURES IS AN IMPORTANT ELEMENT. THE AMOUNT OF MOVEMENT OF THE FEATURES IS SUGGESTED TO DECREASE WITH AGE AND IS THOUGHT TO REPRESENT THE AMOUNT OF CONTACT ONE HAS WITH THE OUTSIDE WORLD. 22. 22. ANALYSIS (MACHOVER) ARMS AND HANDS: REPRESENT EGO DEVELOPMENT AND SOCIAL ADAPTATION. OMITTED: REPRESENTS A COMPLETE WITHDRAWAL FROM THE ENVIRONMENT. IF A MALE OMITS A FEMALE’S ARMS, THEN HE HAS BEEN REJECTED BY HIS MOTHER AND UNACCEPTED BY FEMALES. IF ONE OMITS HANDS, THEY ARE THOUGHT TO HAVE A LACK OF CONFIDENCE IN SOCIAL CONTEXTS. SHADING: TOO VIGOROUSLY SHADED HANDS COULD INDICATE FEELINGS OF GUILT IN REGARD TO AGGRESSIVE IMPULSES. PLACEMENT OF ARMS: EXTENDED ARMS REPRESENT GOOD RELATIONSHIP WITH THE ENVIRONMENT OR SPONTANEITY. IF THEY ARE WASTED THE INDIVIDUAL COULD HAVE A LOW SENSE OF PHYSICAL REALITY. PLACEMENT OF HANDS: BEHIND THE BACK MAY REPRESENT GLAMOR ASPIRATIONS FOR GIRLS, IN THE POCKET COULD INDICATE WITHDRAWAL FROM SOCIETY OR FEELINGS OF GUILT ABOUT MASTURBATION. 23. 23. ANALYSIS (MACHOVER) FINGERS: FINGERS ARE ESPECIALLY IMPPORTANT BECAUSE OF THEIR CONNECTION WITH AN INDIVIDUALS PERSONAL IDENTITY AND ARE MOSTLY USED TO REPRESENT LEVELS OF AGGRESSION. IF THEY ARE OVER EXAGGERATED THEY CAN BE INDICATORS OF GUILT. HOW LONG THEY ARE MAY REPRESENT LEVELS OF AGGRESSION, TOO LONG MAY MEAN THE PERSON IS OVERLY AGGRESSIVE, TOO SHORT, MEANS THEY ARE RESERVED. TOES: OFTEN NOT INCLUDED IN DRAWINGS BECAUSE OF SHOES, BUT IF THEY ARE, IT IS A SIGN OF AGGRESSION. IF A FEMALE SHOWS PAINTED TOENAILS, THEY MAY HAVE HEIGHTENED FEMALE AGGRESSION. 24. 24. ADMINISTRATION 25. 25. DAP: A GREAT WAY TO TELL THE KIDS’ INTELLIGENCE. TEST ADMINISTRATION INVOLVES THE ADMINISTRATOR REQUESTING THE CHILDREN TO COMPLETE THREE INDIVIDUAL DRAWINGS- A MAN, A WOMAN AND HIM/HERSELF ON SEPARATE PIECES OF PAPER. THE ADMINISTRATOR MAY ASK THE CHILDREN TO INCLUDE THE NAME, AGE, FEELINGS OR WHAT IS HIS/ HER DRAWING IS DOING AT THE MOMENT ASIDE FROM THAT NO FURTHER INSTRUCTION IS GIVEN. AND THE CHILD IS FREE TO MAKE THE DRAWING WHICHEVER WAY HE/SHE PLEASES TO THERE IS NO RIGHT OR WRONG TYPE OF DRAWING, ALTHOUGH THE CHILD MUST MAKE A DRAWING OF A WHOLE PERSON EACH TIME. THE TEST HAS NO TIME LIMIT. 26. 26. SCORING 27. 27. SCORING SCORE DESCRIPTION 0 AIMLESS UNCONTROLLED SCRIBBLING 1 LINES SOMEWHAT CONTROLLED APPROACHES CRUDE GEOMETRICAL FORMS. ALL DRAWINGS THAT CAN BE RECOGNIZED AS ATTEMPTS TO REPRESENT THE HUMAN FIGURE IS SCORED PLUS OR MINUS ONE. ONE CREDIT FOR EACH POINT SCORED PLUS AND NO HALF CREDITS GIVEN. TO EVALUATE INTELLIGENCE THE ADMINISTRATOR USES THE DRAW- A-PERSON: QUANTITATIVE SCORING SYSTEM. TO ASSESS THE TEST TAKER FOR EMOTIONAL PROBLEMS, THE ADMINISTRATOR USES THE DRAW-A-PERSON: SCREENING PROCEDURE FOR EMOTIONAL DISTURBANCE TO SCORE THE DRAWINGS. 28. 28. INTERPRETATION 29. 29. INTERPRETATION LARGE HEAD- FANTASY IS PRIMARY SOURCE OF SATISFACTION SMALL HEAD- FEELINGS OF WEAKNESS AND INTELLECTUAL INFERIORITY LONG HAIR- AMBIVELANT SEXUAL FANTASIES TINY EYES- STRONG VISUAL CURIOSITY LARGE EARS- HYPERSENSITIVITY TO CRITICISMS TRIANGLE NOSE- IMMATURITY POINTED NOSE- POSSIBLE ACTING OUT TENDENCIES TINY MOUTH- DENIAL OF ORAL DEPENDENT NEEDS HANDS BEHIND THE BACK- POSSIBLY GUILT FEELINGS FOR MANUAL ACTIVITY TINY FEET- INSECURITY HIGH HEEL SHOES- POSIBLE HOMOSEXUAL TENDENCIES STICK FIGURE- POSSIBE DEPRESSION OPPOSITE SEX DRAWN FIRST- CONFLICT WITH SEXUAL IDENTIFICATION. 30. 30. THANKYOU FOR LISTENING!

-------------------------------------------------
Sentence completion tests
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Sentence completion tests are a class of semi-structured projective techniques. Sentence completion tests typically provide respondents with beginnings of sentences, referred to as “stems,” and respondents then complete the sentences in ways that are meaningful to them. The responses are believed to provide indications of attitudes, beliefs, motivations, or other mental states. Therefore, sentence completion technique, with such advantage, promotes the respondents to disclose their concealed feelings.[1]Notwithstanding, there is debate over whether or not sentence completion tests elicit responses from conscious thought rather than unconscious states. This debate would affect whether sentence completion tests can be strictly categorized as projective tests.
A sentence completion test form may be relatively short, such as those used to assess responses to advertisements, or much longer, such as those used to assess personality. A long sentence completion test is the Forer Sentence Completion Test, which has 100 stems. The tests are usually administered in booklet form where respondents complete the stems by writing words on paper.
The structures of sentence completion tests vary according to the length and relative generality and wording of the sentence stems. Structured tests have longer stems that lead respondents to more specific types of responses; less structured tests provide shorter stems, which produce a wider variety of responses.
Sentence completion questions account for about one quarter of the marks for the critical reading section of SAT I. Each question contains one or two blanks, and you have to find the best answer choice to make the sentence make complete sense. Be sure to study the sentence carefully so that you notice all the clues built into the sentence. On the actual test the sentence completion questions will be graded from easy to hard. On average you will need a little under one minute to answer each question. Our mini tests have 12 questions to be answered in 10 minutes. After each test review your wrong answers to see whether you missed any clues, and make a note of all the words you are not sure of.

The Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) is a projective psychological test. Proponents of this technique assert that a person's responses reveal underlying motives, concerns, and the way they see the social world through the stories they make up about ambiguous pictures of people.[1] Historically, it has been among the most widely researched, taught, and used of such tests.[2]
Contents
[hide] * 1 History * 2 Procedure * 3 Psychometric characteristics * 3.1 Reliability * 3.2 Validity * 3.3 Alternate considerations * 4 Scoring systems * 5 Criticisms * 6 Contemporary applications of TAT * 7 In popular culture * 8 See also * 9 References * 10 External links
-------------------------------------------------
History[edit]
The TAT was developed during the 1930s by the American psychologist Henry A. Murray and lay psychoanalyst Christiana D. Morgan at the Harvard Clinic at Harvard University. Anecdotally, the idea for the TAT emerged from a question asked by one of Murray's undergraduate students, Cecilia Roberts.[3] She reported that when her son was ill, he spent the day making up stories about images in magazines and she asked Murray if pictures could be employed in a clinical setting to explore the underlying dynamics of personality.
Murray wanted to use a measure that would reveal information about the whole person but found the contemporary tests of his time lacking in this regard. Therefore, he created the TAT. The rationale behind the technique is that people tend to interpret ambiguous situations in accordance with their own past experiences and current motivations, which may be conscious or unconscious. Murray reasoned that by asking people to tell a story about a picture, their defenses to the examiner would be lowered as they would not realize the sensitive personal information they were divulging by creating the story.[4]
Murray and Morgan spent the 1930s selecting pictures from illustrative magazines and developing the test. After 3 versions of the test (Series A, Series B, and Series C), Morgan and Murray decided on the final set of pictures, Series D, which remains in use today.[3] Although she was given first authorship on the first published paper about the TAT in 1935, Morgan did not receive authorship credit on the final published instrument. Reportedly, her role in the creation of the TAT was primarily in the selection and editing of the images, but due to the primacy of the name on the original publication the majority of written inquiries about the TAT were addressed to her; since most of these letters included questions that she could not answer, she requested that her name be removed from future authorship.[5]
During the time Murray was developing the TAT he was also involved in Herman Melville studies. The therapeutic technique originally came to him from the "Doubloon chapter" in Moby Dick.[6] In this chapter, multiple characters inspect the same image (a Dubloon), but each character has vastly different interpretations of the imagery—Ahab sees symbols of himself in the coin, while the religiously devout Starbuck sees the Christian Trinity. Other characters provide interpretations of the image that give more insight into the characters themselves based on their interpretations of the imagery. Crew members, including Ahab, project their self perceptions unto the coin which was nailed to the mast. Murray, a lifelong Melvillist, often maintained that all of Melville's oeuvre was for him a TAT.
After World War II, the TAT was adopted more broadly by psychoanalysts and clinicians to evaluate emotionally disturbed patients. Later, in the 1970s, the Human Potential Movement encouraged psychologists to use the TAT to help their clients understand themselves better and stimulate personal growth.
-------------------------------------------------
Procedure[edit]
The TAT is popularly known as the picture interpretation technique because it uses a series of provocative yet ambiguous pictures about which the subject is asked to tell a story. The TAT manual provides the administration instructions used by Murray,[7] although these procedures are commonly altered. The subject is asked to tell as dramatic a story as they can for each picture presented, including the following: * what has led up to the event shown * what is happening at the moment * what the characters are feeling and thinking * what the outcome of the story was
If these elements are omitted, particularly for children or individuals of low cognitive abilities, the evaluator may ask the subject about them directly. Otherwise, the examiner is to avoid interjecting and should not answer questions about the content of the pictures. The examiner records stories verbatim for later interpretation.
The complete version of the test contains 32 picture cards. Some of the cards show male figures, some female, some both male and female figures, some of ambiguous gender, some adults, some children, and some show no human figures at all. One card is completely blank and is used to elicit both a scene and a story about the given scene from the storyteller. Although the cards were originally designed to be matched to the subject in terms of age and gender, any card may be used with any subject. Murray hypothesized that stories would yield better information about a client if the majority of cards administered featured a character similar in age and gender to the client.[7]
Although Murray recommended using 20 cards, most practitioners choose a set of between 8 and 12 selected cards, either using cards that they feel are generally useful, or that they believe will encourage the subject's expression of emotional conflicts relevant to their specific history and situation.[8] However, the examiner should aim to select a variety of cards in order to get a more global perspective of the storyteller and to avoid confirmation bias (i.e., finding only what you are looking for).
Many of the TAT drawing consists set of themes such as success and failure, competition and jealousy, feeling about relationships, aggression and sexuality.[9] These are usually depicted through picture cards.
-------------------------------------------------
Psychometric characteristics[edit]
Thematic Apperception Tests are meant to evoke an involuntary display of one’s subconscious. There is no standardization for evaluating one’s TAT responses; each evaluation is completely subjective because each response is unique. Validity and reliability are, consequently, the largest question marks of the TAT.[10] There are trends and patterns, which help identify psychological traits, but there are no distinct responses to indicate different conditions a patient may or may not have. Medical professionals most commonly use it in the early stages of patient treatment. The TAT helps professionals identify a broad range of issues that their patients may suffer from. Even when individual scoring procedures are examined, the absence of standardization or norms make it difficult to compare the results of validity and reliability research across studies. Specifically, even studies using the same scoring system often use different cards, or a different number of cards.[11] Standardization is also absent amongst clinicians, who often alter the instructions and procedures.[12] Murstein[13] explained that different cards may be more or less useful for specific clinical questions and purposes, making the use of one set of cards for all clients impractical.
Reliability[edit]
Internal consistency, a reliability estimate focusing on how highly test items correlate to each other, is often quite low for TAT scoring systems. Some authors have argued that internal consistency measures do not apply to the TAT. In contrast to traditional test items, which should all measure the same construct and be correlated to each other, each TAT card represents a different situation and should yield highly different response themes.[10] Lilienfeld and colleagues [11] countered this point by questioning the practice of compiling TAT responses to form scores. Both inter-rater reliability (the degree to which different raters score TAT responses the same) and test–retest reliability (to degree to which individuals receive the same scores over time) are highly variable across scoring techniques.[13] However, Murray asserted that TAT answers are highly related to internal states such that high test-retest reliability should not be expected.[11] Gruber and Kreuzpointner (2013) developed a new method for calculating internal consistency using categories instead of pictures. As they demonstrated in a mathematical proof, their method provides a better fit for the underlying construction principles of TAT, and also achieved adequate Cronbach's alpha scores up to .84 [14]
Validity[edit]
The validity of the TAT, or the degree to which it measures what it is supposed to measure,[15] is low.[11] Jenkins [16] has stated that “the phrase ‘validity of the TAT’ is meaningless, because validity is specific not to the pictures, but to the set of scores derived from the population, purpose, and circumstances involved in any given data collection." That is, the validity of the test would be ascertained by seeing how clinician's decisions were assisted based on the TAT. Evidence on this front suggests it is a weak guide at best. For example, one study indicated that clinicians classified individuals as clinical or non-clinical at close to chance levels (57% where 50% would be guessing) based on TAT data alone. The same study found that classifications were 88% correct based on MMPI data. Interestingly, using TAT in addition to the MMPI reduced accuracy to 80%.[17]
Alternate considerations[edit]
Despite the conflicting information about the psychometric characteristics of the TAT, proponents have argued that the TAT should not be judged using traditional standards of reliability and validity. According to Holt,[18] “the TAT is a complex method of assessing people, which does not lend itself to the standard rules of thumb about test standards [. . .]” (p. 101). For example, it has been argued that the purpose of the TAT is to reveal a wide range of personality characteristics and complex, nuanced patterns, as opposed to traditional psychological tests that are designed to measure unitary and narrow constructs.[16] Hibbard and colleagues[19] examined several considerations about traditional views of reliability and validity as they apply to the TAT. First, they noted that traditional views of reliability may limit the validity of a measure (such as occurs with multi-faceted concepts in which characteristics are not necessarily related to each other, but are meaningful in combination). Further, Cronbach's alpha, a commonly used measure of internal consistency, is dependent on the number of items in scale. For the TAT, most scales use only a small number of cards (with each card treated like an item) so alphas would not be expected to be very high. Many clinicians also discount the importance of psychometrics, believing that generalizability of the findings to a given client’s situation is more important than generalizing findings to the population.[16]
-------------------------------------------------
Scoring systems[edit]
When he created the TAT, Murray also developed a scoring system based on his need-press theory of personality. Murray's system involved coding every sentence given for the presence of 28 needs and 20 presses (environmental influences), which were then scored from 1 to 5, based on intensity, frequency, duration, and importance to the plot.[7]However, implementing this scoring system is time-consuming and was not widely used. Rather, examiners have traditionally relied on their clinical intuition to come to conclusions about storytellers.[20]
Although not widely used in the clinical setting, several formal scoring systems have been developed for analyzing TAT stories systematically and consistently. Two common methods that are currently used in research are the:
Defense Mechanisms Manual DMM.[21] This assesses three defense mechanisms: denial (least mature), projection (intermediate), and identification (most mature). A person's thoughts/feelings are projected in stories involved.
Social Cognition and Object Relations SCOR[22] scale. This assesses four different dimensions of object relations: Complexity of Representations of People, Affect-Tone of Relationship Paradigms, Capacity for Emotional Investment in Relationships and Moral Standards, and Understanding of Social Causality.
Personal Problem-Solving System—Revised (PPSS-R[23][24]). This assesses how people identify, think about and resolve problems through the scoring of thirteen different criteria. This scoring system is useful because theoretically, good problem-solving ability is an indicator of an individual’s mental health. Although the TAT is a projective personality technique that is based primarily on the psychoanalytic perspective, the PPSS-R scoring system is designed for clinicians and researchers working from a cognitive behavioral framework. The PPSS-R scoring system has been studied in a wide range of populations, including college students, community residents, jail inmates, university clinic clients, community mental health center clients, and psychiatric day treatment clients. Thus, the PPSS-R scoring system allows clinicians and researchers to assess for problem solving ability and social functioning in many types of people, without being hindered by social desirability effects.
Similar to other scoring systems, with the PPSS-R TAT cards are typically administered individually and examinees responses are recorded verbatim. Unlike other scoring systems, the PPSS-R only uses six of the 31 TAT cards: 1, 2, 4, 7BM, 10, and 13MF. The PPSS-R provides information about four different areas related to problem solving ability: Story Design, Story Orientation, Story Solutions, and Story Resolution. These four areas are assessed by the 13 scoring criteria, 12 of which are rated on a 5-point scale that ranges from -1 to 3.
Each of these scoring categories attempts to measure the following information:
—Story Design measures an individual’s ability to identify and formulate a problem situation.
—Story Orientation assesses an examinees level of personal control, emotional distress, confidence and motivation.
—Story Solutions assesses how impulsive an examinee is. In addition to evaluating the types of problem solutions that are provided, the number of problem solutions that examinees provide for each of the TAT cards is summed.
—Story Resolution provides information on the examinees ability to formulate problem solutions that maximize both short and long-term goals.
Examiners are encouraged to explore information obtained from the TAT stories as hypotheses for testing rather than concrete facts.
-------------------------------------------------
Criticisms[edit]
Like other projective techniques, the TAT has been criticized on the basis of poor psychometric properties (see above).[11] Criticisms include that the TAT is unscientific because it cannot be proved to be valid (that it actually measures what it claims to measure), or reliable (that it gives consistent results over time). As stories about the cards are a reflection of both the conscious and unconscious motives of the storyteller, it is difficult to disprove the conclusions of the examiner and to find appropriate behavioral measures that would represent the personality traits under examination. Characteristics of the TAT that make conclusions based on the stories yielded from TAT cards hard to be disproved have been termed "immunizing tactics".[11] These characteristics include the Walter Mitty effect (i.e., the assertion that individuals will exhibit high levels of a given trait in TAT stories that do not match their overt behavior because TAT responses may represent how a person wishes they were, not how they truly are) and the inhibition effect (i.e., the assertion that individuals will not exhibit high levels of a trait in TAT responses because they are repressing that trait). In addition, as the present needs of the storyteller change over time, it is not expected that later stories will produce the same results.[citation needed].
The lack of standardization of the cards given and scoring systems applied is problematic because it makes comparing research on the TAT very difficult. With a dearth of sound evidence and normative samples, it is tough to determine how much useful information can be gathered in this manner.
Some critics of the TAT cards have observed that the characters and environments are dated, even ‘old-fashioned,’ creating a ‘cultural or psycho-social distance’ between the patients and the stimuli that makes identifying with them less likely.[25] Also, in researching the responses of subjects given photographs versus the TAT, researchers found that the TAT cards evoked more ‘deviant’ stories (i.e., more negative) than photographs, leading researchers to conclude that the difference was due to the differences in the characteristics of the images used as stimuli[citation needed].
In a 2005 dissertation,[26] Matthew Narron, Psy.D. attempted to address these issues by reproducing a Leopold Bellak [27] 10 card set photographically and performing an outcome study. The results concluded that the old TAT elicited answers that included many more specific time references than the new TAT.
-------------------------------------------------
Contemporary applications of TAT[edit]
Despite criticisms, the TAT continues to be used as a tool for research into areas of psychology such as dreams, fantasies, mate selection and what motivates people to choose their occupation. Sometimes it is used in a psychiatric or psychological context to assess personality disorders, thought disorders, in forensic examinations to evaluate crime suspects, or to screen candidates for high-stress occupations. It is also commonly used in routine psychological evaluations, typically without a formal scoring system, as a way to explore emotional conflicts and object relations.[28]
TAT is widely used in France and Argentina using a psychodynamic approach.
David McClelland and Ruth Jacobs conducted a 12-year longitudinal study of leadership using TAT and found no gender differences in motivational predictors of attained management level. The content analysis, however, "revealed 2 distinct styles of power-related themes that distinguished the successful men from the successful women. The successful male managers were more likely to use reactive power themes while the successful female managers were more likely to use resourceful power themes. Differences between the sexes in the power themes were less pronounced among the managers who had remained in lower levels of management" [29]
-------------------------------------------------
In popular culture[edit]
Due to the test's earlier popularity within psychology, in the past the TAT appeared in a wide variety of media. For example, the Thomas Harris novel Red Dragon includes a scene where the imprisoned psychiatrist and serial killer Dr. Hannibal Lecter mocks a previous attempt to administer the test to him, while Michael Crichton included the TAT in the battery of tests given to the disturbed patient and main character Harry Benson in his novel, The Terminal Man. The test is also given to the main characters in two widely differing tales about the human mind: A Clockwork Orange and Daniel Keyes's Flowers for Algernon. Italian poet Edoardo Sanguineti wrote a collection of poetry called T.A.T(1966–1968) that refers to the Test. 1. 1. Thematic Apperception TesT 2. 2. • is a projective test consisting of a series ofpictures in which the examinee isrequested to create a story about thepicture.• method of revealing to the trainedinterpreter some of the dominant drives,emotions, sentiments, complexes andconflicts of personality.• Apperception – refer to the process ofprojecting fantasy imaginary onto anobjective stimuli. 3. 3. History:was conceptualized by Henry Murrayand Christina Morgan on 1935.• Henry Murray– was born on May 13, 1893 into a wealthyfamily.– Has a good relationship with his father butpoor one with his mother, that result him tofeel depression. 4. 4. – A turning point in his life occurred at the ageof 30, when he met and fell in love withChristina Morgan, though married for 7 year.– Carl Jung advice him not to stop therelationship with Morgan and keep bothrelationships. (1925) Christina Morgan- Born in Boston on October 6, 1987- Had a lot of health problems.- Drowned herself on March 14, 1967 at the VirginIslands 5. 5. • Morgan – Murray Thematic apperceptionTest– the original name of the TAT but later onMurray is given primary credit for the test,along with the staff of Harvard PsychologicalClinic.• 1938 the year that Tat was established inHarvard Psychological Clinic• Explorations in Personality in which thedescription of TAT was included. 6. 6. • Murray’s Theory of PersonalityThe TAT is so integrally involved withMurray’s concept of personality that asurvey and knowledge of his basictheoretical components is important. Inconstructing the theory, Murrayemphasizes the biological basis as well asthe social and environmentaldeterminants of behavior. He is alsoconsistently aware of how individualsinteract with their environment. 7. 7. • 1960 – Mrs. Uma Coudharydeveloped Indian Adoption of TAT• Human Potential Movement– encouraged psychologists to use TAT tohelp their clients understand themselvesbetter and stimulate personal growth. 8. 8. General Conditions:• to be administered in an interpersonalsetting.• TAT materials consists of 20 cards onwhich ambiguous pictures are presented.-”M” for males, “F” for females-”B” for boys, “G” for girls-”BM” for boys/males, “GF” forgirls/females. 9. 9. • The selection of cards may beidiosyncratic to the patient’s presentingproblem.SEQUENTIAL NUMBERING SYSTEM (SNS)a) administered to females and malesin exact order : 1, 2, 3BM, 4, 6BM, 7GF,8BM, 9GF, 10, 13MF.b) administered to any males: 1, 2,3BM, 4, 6BM, 7BM, 11, 12M, 13MF.c) administered to any females: 1, 2, 3,3BM, 4, 6GF, 7GF, 9GF, 11, 13GF. 10. 10. • Research purposes : Keiser and Prather(1990) specified Murray’s frequent cards.- 10 most frequent cards : 1, 2, 3BM,3GF, 4, 5, 6BM, 6GF, 8BM and 8GF.• During administration, the subject shouldbe seated beside the examiner with hisor her chair turned away. 11. 11. Instructions:• The examiner will show some picturesone at a time, and the subject will bemaking up as dramatic a story ashe/she can for each picture card. 50minutes for 10 pictures. The followingstory structure must be obtained: 12. 12. a) current situation ; what ishappening at the moment?b) thoughts and feelings of thecharacter (s); what the characters arefeeling and thinking?c) preceding events; what has led upto the event shown in the picture?d) outcome ; what was the outcome? 13. 13. Procedures:• TIMEtime measured should begin when thepicture is first presented and end when thesubject begins his or her story.• RECORDINGa subject’s complete responses should berecorded, along with any noteworthy behavioralobservations: exclamation, stuttering, pauses,blushing, degree of involvement , andchange in voice inflection. 14. 14. • QUESTIONING and INQUIRYto produce an unhampered andfree-flow of the subject’s fantasymaterial.• ORDER OF PRESENTATIONusually, the cards should beadministered according to theirsequential numbering system. 15. 15. • USE OF THE TAT (or CAT) with CHILDREN:-instructions should be modified inaccordance with their age andvocabulary.-for the use with children, the TAT cardsthat have the highest number ofinterpretable responses and the lowestnumber of responses are the following: 16. 16. a) in order of usefulness : 7GF,18GF, 3GF, and 8GF.b) least helpful cards are 19,18BM, 11 and 12BG(Bellak and Abrams, 1997) 17. 17. • CAT usually used to 3-10 yrs old(Bellak 1949)• 1965 – CAT-H for 11-15 yrs old 18. 18. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:• TAT to children ages 8-11 yrs old : 1, 3BM,7GF, 8BM, 12M, 13B, 14, 17BM (Obsrzutand Boleik 1968)• TAT for adolescents: 1, 2, 5, 7GF, 12F, 12M,15, 17BM, 18BM, 18GF• Children and adolescents of either gender: 1, 2, 3BM, 4, 5, 6BM, 7GF, 8BM ( Teglasi1993)• (Bellak) SENIOR APPERCEPTION TECHNIQUE(SAT) - for elderly individuals for over 65years of age. 19. 19. Scoring:The Psychological CorporationFor each of the scoring categories,practitioners should abbreviate theirobservations about the person. In some sections,practitioners are asked to indicate the levels ofimportance or strength for the per by puttingone check (mere presence of characteristics),two checks (moderate) or three checks (strong).The entire scoring and interpretation proceduretypically takes a half-hour. 20. 20. • H.A Murray, 1943 scoring the TAT involvesevaluating the following five different aspectsof the stories: The Hero. Scoring for the hero involves identifyingwho is central character(s) in the story Need of the Hero. For Murray, it was also critical toidentify the needs, motives and desire of the hero. Identifying the presses. A press refer to anyimportant environmental factor that may influenceor interfere with the need of the hero.Example: (parents or boss), (the lock on the door isbroken) 21. 21. Scoring for themes. Scoring for themes in TATstories involves noting the nature of theinterplay and conflict between the needs andpresses, the types of emotion elicited by thisconflict, and the way the conflict is resolved. Scoring for outcome. Scoring for the outcomeof the story involves analyzing how the storiesend by noting a happy versus unhappy endingand assessing the extent to which the ending iscontrolled by the strengths of the hero andforces in the environment. 22. 22. Interpretation:• Nomethetic and Idiogrphic.1. Nomothethic Interpretation refers to the practiceof establishing norms for answer from subjects inspecific age, gender, racial, or educational levelgroups and then measuring a given subject’sresponses against those norms.2. Idiographic Interpretation refers to evaluating theunique features of the subject’s view of the worldand relationships.Most psychologists would classify the TAT isbetter suited to idiographic than nomothethicinterpretations 23. 23. • In interpreting the responses of the TAT, theexaminers typically focus their attention onone of the three (3) areas:•The content of the stories that thesubject tells;•The feeling or the tone of the stories;•The subject’s behavior apart fromresponses. These behavior may include:Verbal Remarks (e.g. comments aboutfeeling stressed by situation or not beinggood story teller) as well as NonverbalActions or Signs (e.g. blushing stammering,fidgeting in the chair, difficulties making aneye contact with the examiner, etc.) 24. 24. • The story content usually reveals thesubject’s attitudes, fantasies, wishes,inner conflicts, and view of the outsideworld.• The story structure typically reflects thesubject’s feelings, assumptions aboutthe world, and an underlying attitudeof optimism or pessimism. 25. 25. • The 3 Levels of Interpretations suggestby Bellak & Abram, 1997 are:•Descriptive Level- it is the mererepeat of the story•Interpretative Level- It extends thedescriptive level by an alteration of it[if one does the X, then the outcomewill be Y.].•Diagnostic Level- It is the furtherextension I that an interference ismade about the client. 26. 26. • In Example Given:PICTURE 1– Descriptive level (the boyis practicing to increasehis competence.)– Interpretative level (If onepractice, then he or shewill improve.)– Diagnostic level (Theclient has a high need forachievement with a highlevel of self- efficacy.The boy is 27. 27. Results:• The results of the TAT must be interpretedin the context of the subject’s personalhistory, age, sex, level of education,occupation, racial or ethnicidentification first language, and othercharacteristics that may be important.“Normal” results are difficult to define ina complex multicultural society like thecontemporary United States. 28. 28. • The results of the ThematicApperception Test are difficult togeneralize. The results are oftensubjective and do not use any formaltype of scoring system. However, aclose analysis of the stories told by thesubject normally gives the tester adecent idea of the traits mentionedabove (personality, emotional control,and attitudes towards aspects ofeveryday life). 29. 29. – Companies sometimes use thematicapperception tests to screen potentialemployees. This test can determine (to acertain extent) whether the potentialemployee is likely to succeed at a certainposition For example: Can they handlestressful situations? How will they react toemotional conflicts? Will they fit well withthe general atmosphere and attitude ofthe company? 30. 30. – Thematic Apperception Tests are lessbeneficial to individuals. However,individuals can use the results todetermine if an industry or company isright for them. The results can also helpthe person understand their unconsciousself, which can help them find ways tosuccessfully increase their productivityand efficacy on the job. A trueunderstanding of one self can provideover your co-workers and competitors. 31. 31. Thematic Apperception Test(TAT)Picture 1:A boy is sitting at atable looking at aviolin placed on thetable in front of him. 32. 32. Picture 2 : Country scene with a womanholding a book in the foreground. In thebackground, a man is working a fieldwhile a woman watches. 33. 33. General Discussion• This is the only card in the seriesthat presents the group scene andgives information relating to howthe individual deals with thechallenge of people livingtogether. 34. 34. Picture 3BM : A boy is huddled next to acouch. On the floor next to him is anambiguous object that could be a set ofkeys or a revolver. 35. 35. General Discussion• This is identified as one of the most useful pictures for itconcerns themes of guilt, depression, aggression, andimpulsive control.For example, if the object is described as a gun, is itused or intended to used for:*Intra-aggression-thesubject is going to use it to damage oneself, or*Extra-aggression-the subject has used it or going touse it to damage or harm another person.This picture is particularly important for depressedpatients, whether male or female, because it canreveal important dynamics regarding the manner inwhich the depression developed and how it iscurrently being maintained 36. 36. Picture 3GF : A woman is standing next to anopen door with one hand grabbing theside of the door and the other holdingher downcast face. 37. 37. General Discussion• The same general trend that hold forPicture 3BM are also true here, in thatboth pictures tend to bring outdepressive feelings. Frequently, however,Picture 3BM brings out somewhat richerstories and allows both males andfemales to identify with the centralfigure. 38. 38. Picture 4 : A woman is grabbing theshoulders of a man who is turning awayfrom her. 39. 39. General Discussion• This picture typically elicits a good dealof information relating to the feelingsand attitudes surrounding male-femalerelationship. Frequently, themes ofinfidelity and betrayal emerge, anddetails regarding the male attitudestoward the role of women may bediscussed. 40. 40. Picture 5 : A woman is looking into a roomfrom the threshold of a door. 41. 41. General Discussion• This picture often reveals informationsurrounding attitudes about the subjectsmother in her role of observing andpossibly judging behavior. It is importantto note how the woman is perceivedand how the situation is resolved.This card elicits paranoid fears of attackor intrusion by an outsider, representedby stories in which the woman issurprised by a burglar 42. 42. Picture 6BM : An elderly woman is standingparallel to a window. Behind her is ayounger man with his face down. He isholding onto his hat. 43. 43. General Discussion• This picture can be important to includewhen testing males. It usually proves tobe rich source of information regardingattitudes and feelings toward theirmother or maternal figures in general.Because the stories usually revolvearound a young man striving forindependence, the specific manner inwhich the subject depicts this struggle isimportant. 44. 44. Picture 6GF : A young woman sitting on theedge of a sofa looks back over hershoulder at an older man with a pipe inhis mouth who seems to be addressingher. 45. 45. General Discussion• This card was originally intended to be thefemale counterpart to Picture 6BM,, and it washoped that it, too, would elicit attitudes andfeelings toward paternal figures. However,because the two figures are often seen asbeing about an equal age, the cardfrequently does not accompilsh0 its intendedpurpose. When clear father-daughter plots arenot discussed, the picture reflects thesubject’s style and approach to instructedheterosexual relationship. 46. 46. Picture 7BM : An older man is looking at ayounger man, who appears to bepeering into space. 47. 47. General Discussion• This card is extremely useful in obtaininginformation about the authority figures and,more specifically the subjects own father. Thepicture deals with hierarchicalPersonal relationships and usually takes theform of an older, more experienced maninteracting with the younger, less experiencedone.. Thus, the card can clearly show how thesubject deals with external demands andattitudes toward authority. 48. 48. Picture 7GF : A young girl is seated on acouch and is holding a doll in her hands.Behind her is an older woman whoappears to be reading to her out of abook. 49. 49. General Discussion• The intention here is to bring out the style andmanner of mother-child interaction. When theolder women are the subjects, the pictureoften elicits feelings and attitudes towardchildren. Because both figures are lookingaway, either figure is sometimes perceived asrejecting the other. This, the card draws outnegative feeling and interactions, and it isimportant to note how these feelings areresolved, expressed, or avoided. Sometimesthe older woman is described as reading afairy story to the younger girl. 50. 50. Picture 8BM : A young boy in the foregroundis staring directly out of the picture. In thebackground is a hazy image of two menperforming surgery on a patient who islying down. 51. 51. General Discussion• The picture can be seen as a thinly veileddepiction of a young man’s oedipal conflicts,with concomitant feelings of castrationanxiety and hostility. Thus, it is important tonote what feelings the boy or the othercharacters in the story have toward the olderman performing the surgery. If the storydepicts a need for achievement expressed bythe younger man, it is also likely the he willidentifyWith the older one and perhaps use him as anexample, If this is the case, the details of howthe identification may be helpful. 52. 52. Picture 8GF : A woman is sitting on a chairstaring into space with her chin resting inher hand. 53. 53. General Discussion• This picture is difficult to generalizeabout. Typically, it produces somewhatshallow stories of a contemplativenature. 54. 54. Picture 9BM : Four men in a field are lyingagainst one another. 55. 55. General Discussion• This picture is particularly helpful inproviding information about relation withthe members of the same sex.Sometimes, heterosexual tendencies orfears regarding such tendenciesbecome evident in the story plot. Socialprejudice often becomes apparent,particularly when the men in the pictureare seen as homeless. 56. 56. Picture 9GF : A woman in the foreground isstanding behind a tree, observinganother woman who is running along abeach below. 57. 57. General Discussion• This card basically deals with femalepeer relations and is important inelaborating on the issues such as conflictresolution, jealousy, sibling rivalry, andcompetitiveness. Because the figurestanding behind the tree is carefullyobserving the woman on the bench,stories may provide details surroundingparanoid ideation. 58. 58. Picture 10 : One person is holding his or herhead against another person’s shoulder.The gender of the two persons is notdefined. 59. 59. General Discussion• This card often gives useful informationregarding how the subject perceivesmale-female relationship, particularlythose involving some degree ofcloseness and intimacy. It might behelpful to notice the relative degree ofcomfort or discomfort evoked byemotional closeness. A story ofdeparture or of termination of therelationship may be reflective of eitherovert or denied hostility on the part ofthe subject. 60. 60. Picture 11 : On a road in a chasm, severalfigures are proceeding along a pathtoward a bridge. Above them andagainst the side of a cliff appears to bea dragon. 61. 61. General Discussion• Because the form of the picture is quitevague and ambiguous, it is good test ofthe subjects’ imaginative abilities andtheir skills in integrating irregular andpoorly refined stimuli. The picture alsorepresents unknown and threateningforces and reflects the manner in whichthe subjects deal with fear of attack. 62. 62. Picture 12M : A man with his hand raised isstanding above a boy who is lying on abed with his eyes closed. 63. 63. General Discussion• This picture often elicits themes regarding therelationship between an older (usually moreauthoritative) man and a younger one. Thiscan be significant in predicting or assessingthe current or future relationship between thetherapist and the client. The manner in whichthe older man is perceived is particularlyimportant. The picture can represent specificsof the transference relationship and such, canbe an aid in interpreting and providingfeedback to the client regarding thisrelationship. In particular, subjects frequentlyreveal attitudes toward some externalcontrolling forces. 64. 64. Picture 12F : A portrait of a woman is in theforeground; an older woman holding herchin is in the background. 65. 65. General Discussion• This picture elicits descriptions andconceptions of mother figures. Thebackground figure is frequently seen asa mother-in-law who has a variety of evilqualities. Often, these negative qualitiesare feelings that the subject has towardher own mother but can indirectly, and,therefore, more safely, project onto thefigure of a mother-in-law 66. 66. Picture 12BG : A country setting depicts atree, with a rowboat pulled up next to it.No human figures are present. 67. 67. General Discussion• With suicidal or depressed subjects,there may be an elaboration of feelingsof abandonment and isolation), forexample: someone has been lost or hasbeen fallen from a boat. More stableand adjusted subjects are likely todiscuss the peace of being alone in thewoods and perhaps of fishing or havinggone fishing further down the stream. 68. 68. Picture 13MF : A young man is standing inthe foreground with his head in his arms.In the background is a woman lying in abed. 69. 69. General Discussion• This picture is often helpful in revealing sexual conflicts.In a general way, it provides information on thesubject’s attitudes and feelings toward his or herpartner, in particularly attitudes just before andimmediately following the sexual intercourse. Stories inwhich there are overt expressions of aggression orrevulsion are significant variations and should benoted as relatively unusual. In particular, the relationbetween a subject’s aggressive and sexual feelings isfrequently portrayed.Because this picture has a relatively large number ofdetails, obsessive-compulsive personalities frequentlyspend an excessive amount of time in describing andexplaining these details. This approach may beparticularly evident when the picture has a shockeffect and may, therefore, create an anxiety. 70. 70. Picture 13B : A boy is sitting in the doorwayof a log cabin. 71. 71. General Discussion• This picture may help both adults andchildren to reveal attitudes towardintrospection or loneliness. In adults, itfrequently elicits reveries involvingchildhood memories. 72. 72. Picture 13G : A girl is climbing a flight ofstairs. 73. 73. General Discussion• This picture lacks the specificity and theimpact found in other TAT cards. Itusually produces stories that are highlyvaried but lacking in richness anddetails. Like picture 13 B, it cansometimes useful in depicting a subject’sattitude toward loneliness andintrospection. 74. 74. Picture 14 : A person is silhouetted against awindow. 75. 75. General Discussion• If a subject’s presenting problem is depression,especially if there is evidence of suicidal ideation, thiscard, along Picture 3 BM, is essential.. This type ofsubject often describes the figure in the picture and,more importantly discusses the events, feeling, andattitudes that led up to the current self-destructivebehavior. It becomes important to investigate, duringthe inquiry phase of examination, the particularmethods and styles of problem solving that the storycharacter has attempted or is attemptingThis picture may also reveal the subject’s aestheticsinterest and personal philosophical beliefs or wishfulfillments. 76. 76. Picture 15 : A man is standing amongtombstones with his hands claspedtogether. 77. 77. General Discussion• This reflects the subject’s particular beliefsabout, and attitudes toward, death and thedying process. For example death may beviewed as a passive, quiet process, or, incontrast, it can be violent, aggressivesituation. If the subject is having an extremelydifficult time coping with the death of a friendand relative, the themes on Picture 15 canprovide useful information as to why thisdifficulty is being experienced. The story mightalso indicate unexpressed and problematicanger directed toward the dead person,because of sense of abandonment. 78. 78. Picture 16 : Blank card. 79. 79. General Discussion• The instructions for this card are:• Imagine a picture and then tell a story about it.From the subjects with vivid and active imaginations,this card often elicits extremely rich, useful stories; andthe amount of detail and complexity in a person’sstories have been found to correlate with differentmeasures of creativity (Wakefield, 1986). The carddoes little to shape or influence the subject’s fantasymaterial and can thus be seen as relatively pureproduct of his or her unconscious. However foranxious, resistant, or noncreative subjects, this cardoften a little or no value because the stories areusually brief and lack of depth or richness Inconsidering the story, is helpful to note whether thedepiction involves a scene that is vital and optimistic,or one that is desolate or flat. 80. 80. Picture 17BM : A naked man is climbing up(or down) a rope. 81. 81. General Discussion• Because the card depicts a naked man,attitudes regarding the subject’spersonal body images are oftenrevealed. They in turn may bring outthemes of achievement, physicalprowess, adulation, and narcissism.Possible homosexual feelings or anxietyrelated to homosexuality also becomesevident in the stories of some subjects 82. 82. Picture 17GF : A female is standing on abridge over water. Above the bridge is atall building, and behind the building thesun is shining from behind clouds. 83. 83. General Discussion• Attitudes toward a recent separation or theimpending arrival of a loved one aresometimes described. This card can beparticularly useful in cases of suicidaldepression, where the figure on the bridge isperceived as contemplating jumping off, as alast attempt to resolve her difficulties. As withPicture 3 BM and 14, an inquiry into thespecific difficulties the story character hasencountered and the manner in which shehas attempted to resolve these difficulties canoften reflect the subject’s manner and style ofcoping with his or her own difficulties. 84. 84. Picture 18BM : A man dressed in a long coatis being grabbed from behind. Threehands are visible. 85. 85. General Discussion• This picture, more than any others, islikely to produce anxiety because of thesuggestive depiction of invisible forcesattacking the figure. Thus, it is importantto note how the subject handles his orher own anxiety as well as howcharacter deals with his or her situation. 86. 86. Picture 18GF : A woman has her handsaround the throat of another woman. Inthe background is a flight of stairs. 87. 87. General Discussion• The manner in which the subject handles aggressive,hostile relationships with the other women is primarytype of information this picture elicits. Particular noteshould be made of what types of events trigger thisaggressiveness, and of the manner in which theconflict is or is not resolvedFeelings of inferiority, jealousy, and response to beingdominated are also often described. Although therepresentation of aggressiveness in the picture is quiteexplicit, subjects occasionally attempt to deny oravoid this aggressiveness by creating a story in whichone figure is attempting to help the other one up thestairs. This may point to general denial and repressionof hostility on the part of the subject. 88. 88. Picture 19 : A surreal depiction of clouds anda home covered with snow. 89. 89. General Discussion• Because this is one of the moreunstructured cards, the subject’s abilityto integrate disparate visual stimuli istested. For certain subjects, theambiguous nature of this picture cancreate anxiety and insecurity. Theexaminer can then observe how thesubject handles his or her anxiety in thecontext of the story. Often the storiesproduced deal with impersonalaggression from forces such as nature orthe supernatural. 90. 90. Picture 20 : A hazy, nighttime picture of aman leaning against a lamppost. 91. 91. General Discussion• The picture often elicits informationregarding a subject’s attitudes towardloneliness, darkness, and uncertainty.Fears may be stated explicitly throughgangster stories. As with Picture 18 BM,the method of handling these fears andthe examinee’s response to physicaldanger should be noted.

Draw A Person Test
Definition:
Typically used with children, the subject is asked to draw a picture of a man, a woman, and themselves. No further instructions are given and the pictures are analyzed on a number of dimensions. Aspects such as the size of the head, placement of the arms, and even things such as if teeth were drawn or not are thought to reveal a range of personality traits (Murstein, 1965). The personality traits can be anything from aggressiveness, to homosexual tendencies, to relationships with their parents, to introversion and extroversion (Machover, 1949). There are many versions of the test, but the one discussed in detail here is the version by Karen Machover in 1949.
History:
The official beginning of when figure drawing was first thought to be associated with personality is unknown. Whether it was the drawing on a cave wall, a painting by a great artist, or a doodle made by an average person, the curiosity somehow came about. However, the formal beginning of it’s use for psychological assessment is known to begin with Florence Goodenough, a child psychologist, in 1926 (Scott, 1981).

Florence Goodenough
Goodenough first became interested in figure drawing when she wanted to find a way to supplement the Stanford-Binet intelligence test with a nonverbal measure. The test was developed to assess maturity in young people. She concluded that the amount of detail involved in a child’s drawing could be used as an effective tool. This led to the development of the first official assessment using figure drawing with her development of the Draw-A-Man test. Over the years, the test has been revised many times with added measures for assessing intelligence (Weiner & Greene, 2008). Harris later revised the test including drawings of a woman and of themselves. Now considered the Goodenough-Harris Test it has guidelines for assessing children from ages 6 to 17 (Scott, 1981).

Karen Machover's Book
Soon after the development of the test, psychologists started considering the test for measures of differences in personality as well as intelligence. In 1949, Karen Machover developed the first measure of figure drawing as a personality assessment with the Draw A Person Test(Machover, 1949).
Machover did a lot of work with disturbed adolescents and adults and used the test to assess people of all ages. She wrote a book on her measure expressing that the features of the figures drawn reflect underlying attitudes, concerns, and personality traits. In her test, she included a suggestion to ask about the person they have drawn. She advises to ask them to tell the administrator a story about the figure as if they were in a novel or play. Machover used a qualitative approach in her interpretation considering individual drawing characteristics (Machover, 1949). Others have since suggested a more quantitative approach that can be more widely used analyzing selected characteristics that are in an index of deeper meanings (Murstein, 1965).
The most popular quantitative approach was developed by Elizabeth Koppitz. Koppitz developed a measure of assessment that has a list of emotional indicators including size of figures, omission of body parts, and some “special features”. The total number of the indicators is simply added up to provide a number that represents the likeliness of disturbance (Murstein, 1965).

House-Tree-Person Test
With the Draw a Person test as a base, a number of other tests have developed using figure drawing as a personality assessment tool. For example, the House-Tree-Person test similarly just asks the person to draw those three objects and then inquires about what they have drawn. The questions asked for inquiry include what kinds of activities go on in the house, what are the strongest parts of the tree, and what things make the person angry or sad. The KFD (Kinetic Family Drawing) tells the drawer to draw their family doing something (Murstein, 1965).

KFD Test
All of these tests have the important element of not only the assessment of the pictures themselves, but also the thematic variables involved. Every figure drawing test asks the drawer to include some kind of description or interpretation of what is happening in the picture. These elements are also analyzed accordingly (Weiner & Greene, 2008).
Advantages:
-Easy to administer (only about 20-30 minutes plus 10 minutes of inquiry)
-Helps people who have anxieties taking tests (no strict format)
-Can assess people with communication problems
-Relatively culture free
-Allow for self administration
Disadvantages:
-Restricted amount of hypotheses can be developed
-Relatively non-verbal, but may have some problems during inquiry
-Little research backing

"Rorschach Test" redirects here. For the band, see Rorschach Test (band). Rorschach test | Diagnostics | | The first of the ten cards in the Rorschach test, with the occurrence of the most statistically frequent details indicated.[1][2] The images themselves are only one component of the test, whose focus is the analysis of the perception of the images. | | 29% | | | 18% | | | 6% | | | | MeSH | D012392 |
The Rorschach test (/ˈrɔrʃɑːk/ or /ˈrɔərʃɑːk/,[3] German pronunciation: [ˈʀoːɐ̯ʃax]; also known as the Rorschach inkblot test, the Rorschach technique, or simply the inkblot test) is a psychological test in which subjects' perceptions of inkblots are recorded and then analyzed using psychological interpretation, complex algorithms, or both. Some psychologists use this test to examine a person's personality characteristics and emotional functioning. It has been employed to detect underlying thought disorder, especially in cases where patients are reluctant to describe their thinking processes openly.[4] The test is named after its creator, Swiss psychologist Hermann Rorschach.
In the 1960s, the Rorschach was the most widely used projective test.[5] In a national survey in the U.S., the Rorschach was ranked eighth among psychological tests used in outpatient mental health facilities.[6] It is the second most widely used test by members of the Society for Personality Assessment, and it is requested by psychiatrists in 25% of forensic assessment cases,[6] usually in a battery of tests that often include the MMPI-2 and the MCMI-III.[7] In surveys, the use of Rorschach ranges from a low of 20% bycorrectional psychologists[8] to a high of 80% by clinical psychologists engaged in assessment services, and 80% of psychologygraduate programs surveyed teach it.[9]
Although the Exner Scoring System (developed since the 1960s) claims to have addressed and often refuted many criticisms of the original testing system with an extensive body of research,[10] some researchers continue to raise questions. The areas of dispute include the objectivity of testers, inter-rater reliability, the verifiability and general validity of the test, bias of the test's pathologyscales towards greater numbers of responses, the limited number of psychological conditions which it accurately diagnoses, the inability to replicate the test's norms, its use in court-ordered evaluations, and the proliferation of the ten inkblot images, potentially invalidating the test for those who have been exposed to them.[11]
Contents
[hide] * 1 History * 2 Method * 2.1 Features or categories * 2.2 Symmetry of the test items * 2.3 Exner scoring system * 2.4 Rorschach performance assessment system * 2.5 Cultural differences * 3 Inkblots * 4 Prevalence * 4.1 United States * 4.2 United Kingdom * 4.3 Japan * 5 Controversy * 5.1 Test materials * 5.2 Illusory and invisible correlations * 5.3 Tester projection * 5.4 Validity * 5.5 Reliability * 5.6 Population norms * 5.7 Applications * 5.8 Protection of test items and ethics * 6 See also * 7 Notes * 8 References * 9 External links
-------------------------------------------------
History

Hermann Rorschachcreated the inkblot test in 1921
Using interpretation of "ambiguous designs" to assess an individual's personality is an idea that goes back to Leonardo da Vinci and Botticelli. Interpretation of inkblots was central to a game, Gobolinks,[12] from the late 19th century. Rorschach's, however, was the first systematic approach of this kind.[13]
It has been suggested that Rorschach's use of inkblots may have been inspired by German doctor Justinus Kerner who, in 1857, had published a popular book of poems, each of which was inspired by an accidental inkblot.[14] French psychologist Alfred Binet had also experimented with inkblots as a creativity test,[15] and, after the turn of the century, psychological experiments where inkblots were utilized multiplied, with aims such as studying imagination and consciousness.[16]
After studying 300 mental patients and 100 control subjects, in 1921 Rorschach wrote his book Psychodiagnostik, which was to form the basis of the inkblot test (after experimenting with several hundred inkblots, he selected a set of ten for their diagnostic value),[17] but he died the following year. Although he had served as Vice President of the Swiss Psychoanalytic Society, Rorschach had difficulty in publishing the book and it attracted little attention when it first appeared.[18]
In 1927, the newly founded Hans Huber publishing house purchased Rorschach's book Psychodiagnostik from the inventory of Ernst Bircher.[19]Huber has remained the publisher of the test and related book, with Rorschach a registered trademark of Swiss publisher Verlag Hans Huber, Hogrefe AG.[20] The work has been described as "a densely written piece couched in dry, scientific terminology".[21]
After Rorschach's death, the original test scoring system was improved by Samuel Beck, Bruno Klopfer and others.[22] John E. Exner summarized some of these later developments in the comprehensive system, at the same time trying to make the scoring more statistically rigorous. Some systems are based on the psychoanalytic concept of object relations. The Exner system remains very popular in the United States, while in Europe other methods sometimes dominate,[23][24] such as that described in the textbook by Evald Bohm, which is closer to the original Rorschach system and rooted more deeply in the original psychoanalysisprinciples.[citation needed]
Rorschach never intended the inkblots to be used as a general personality test, but developed them as a tool for the diagnosis of schizophrenia. It was not until 1939 that the test was used as a projective test of personality, a use of which Rorschach had always been skeptical.[25] Interviewed in 2012 for a BBC Radio 4 documentary, Rita Signer, curator of the Rorschach Archives in Bern, Switzerland, suggested that far from being random or chance designs, each of the blots selected by Rorschach for his test had been meticulously designed to be as ambiguous and "conflicted" as possible.[26]
-------------------------------------------------
Method
The tester and subject typically sit next to each other at a table, with the tester slightly behind the subject.[27] This is to facilitate a "relaxed but controlled atmosphere". There are ten official inkblots, each printed on a separate white card, approximately 18x24 cm in size.[28] Each of the blots has near perfect bilateral symmetry. Five inkblots are of black ink, two are of black and red ink and three are multicolored, on a white background.[29][30][31] After the test subject has seen and responded to all of the inkblots (free associationphase), the tester then presents them again one at a time in a set sequence for the subject to study: the subject is asked to note where he sees what he originally saw and what makes it look like that (inquiry phase). The subject is usually asked to hold the cards and may rotate them. Whether the cards are rotated, and other related factors such as whether permission to rotate them is asked, may expose personality traits and normally contributes to the assessment.[32] As the subject is examining the inkblots, the psychologist writes down everything the subject says or does, no matter how trivial. Analysis of responses is recorded by the test administrator using a tabulation and scoring sheet and, if required, a separate location chart.[27]
The general goal of the test is to provide data about cognition and personality variables such as motivations, response tendencies, cognitive operations, affectivity, and personal/interpersonal perceptions. The underlying assumption is that an individual will class external stimuli based on person-specific perceptual sets, and including needs, base motives, conflicts, and that this clustering process is representative of the process used in real-life situations.[33] Methods of interpretation differ. Rorschach scoring systems have been described as a system of pegs on which to hang one's knowledge of personality.[34] The most widely used method in the United States is based on the work of Exner.
Administration of the test to a group of subjects, by means of projected images, has also occasionally been performed, but mainly for research rather than diagnostic purposes.[27]
Test administration is not to be confused with test interpretation:
The interpretation of a Rorschach record is a complex process. It requires a wealth of knowledge concerning personality dynamics generally as well as considerable experience with the Rorschach method specifically. Proficiency as a Rorschach administrator can be gained within a few months. However, even those who are able and qualified to become Rorschach interpreters usually remain in a "learning stage" for a number of years.[27]
Features or categories
The interpretation of the Rorschach test is not based primarily on the contents of the response, i.e., what the individual sees in the inkblot (the content). In fact, the contents of the response are only a comparatively small portion of a broader cluster of variables that are used to interpret the Rorschach data: for instance, information is provided by the time taken before providing a response for a card can be significant (taking a long time can indicate "shock" on the card).[35] as well as by any comments the subject may make in addition to providing a direct response.[36]
In particular, information about determinants (the aspects of the inkblots that triggered the response, such as form and color) and location (which details of the inkblots triggered the response) is often considered more important than content, although there is contrasting evidence.[37][38] "Popularity" and "originality" of responses[39] can also be considered as basic dimensions in the analysis.[40]
Content
| This section requires expansion.(August 2009) |
Content is classified in terms of "human", "nature", "animal", "abstract", etc., as well as for statistical popularity (or, conversely, originality).[41]
More than any other feature in the test, content response can be controlled consciously by the subject, and may be elicited by very disparate factors, which makes it difficult to use content alone to draw any conclusions about the subject's personality; with certain individuals, content responses may potentially be interpreted directly, and some information can at times be obtained by analyzing thematic trends in the whole set of content responses (which is only feasible when several responses are available), but in general content cannot be analyzed outside of the context of the entire test record.[42]
Location
| This section requires expansion.(August 2009) |
The basis for the response is usually the whole inkblot, a detail (either a commonly or an uncommonly selected one), or the negative space around or within the inkblot.[28]
Determinants
Systems for Rorschach scoring generally include a concept of "determinants": these are the factors that contribute to establish the similarity between the inkblot and the subject's content response about it, and they can represent certain basic experiential-perceptual attitudes, showing aspects of the way a subject perceives the world. Rorschach's original work used only form, color and movement; currently, another major determinant considered is shading,[43] which was inadvertently introduced by poor printing of the inkblots (which originally featured uniform saturation), and subsequently recognized as significant by Rorschach himself.[44][45][46]
Form is the most common determinant, and is related to intellectual processes; color responses often provide direct insight into emotional life. Shading and movement have been considered more ambiguously, both in definition and interpretation: Rorschach originally disregarded shading (which was originally not even present on the cards, being a result of the print process),[47] and he considered movement as only actual experiencing of motion, while others have widened the scope of this determinant, taking it to mean that the subject sees something "going on".[48]
More than one determinant can contribute to the formation of the subject's percept, and fusion of two determinants is taken into account, while also assessing which of the two constituted the primary contributor (e.g. "form-color" implies a more refined control of impulse than "color-form"). It is, indeed, from the relation and balance among determinants that personality can be most readily inferred.[48]
Symmetry of the test items
A striking characteristic of the Rorschach inkblots is their symmetry. Many unquestionably accept this aspect of the nature of the images but Rorschach, as well as other researchers, certainly did not. Rorschach experimented with both asymmetric and symmetric images before finally opting for the latter.[49]
He gives this explanation for the decision:
Asymmetric figures are rejected by many subjects; symmetry supplied part of the necessary artistic composition. It has a disadvantage in that it tends to make answers somewhat stereotyped. On the other hand, symmetry makes conditions the same for right and left handed subjects; furthermore, it facilitates interpretation for certain blocked subjects. Finally, symmetry makes possible the interpretation of whole scenes.[50]
The impact of symmetry in the Rorschach inkblot's has also been investigated further by other researchers.[49]
Exner scoring system
The Exner scoring system, also known as the Rorschach Comprehensive System (RCS),[51] is the standard method for interpreting the Rorschach test. It was developed in the 1960s by Dr. John E. Exner, as a more rigorous system of analysis. It has been extensively validated and shows high inter-rater reliability.[10][52] In 1969, Exner published The Rorschach Systems, a concise description of what would be later called "the Exner system". He later published a study in multiple volumes called The Rorschach: A Comprehensive system, the most accepted full description of his system.
Creation of the new system was prompted by the realization that at least five related, but ultimately different methods were in common use at the time, with a sizeable minority of examiners not employing any recognized method at all, basing instead their judgment on subjective assessment, or arbitrarily mixing characteristics of the various standardized systems.[53]
The key components of the Exner system are the clusterization of Rorschach variables and a sequential search strategy to determine the order in which to analyze them,[54]framed in the context of standardized administration, objective, reliable coding and a representative normative database.[55] The system places a lot of emphasis on a cognitive triad of information processing, related to how the subject processes input data, cognitive mediation, referring to the way information is transformed and identified, andideation.[56]
In the system, responses are scored with reference to their level of vagueness or synthesis of multiple images in the blot, the location of the response, which of a variety of determinants is used to produce the response (i.e., what makes the inkblot look like what it is said to resemble), the form quality of the response (to what extent a response is faithful to how the actual inkblot looks), the contents of the response (what the respondent actually sees in the blot), the degree of mental organizing activity that is involved in producing the response, and any illogical, incongruous, or incoherent aspects of responses. It has been reported that popular responses on the first card include bat, badge and coat of arms.[34]
Using the scores for these categories, the examiner then performs a series of calculations producing a structural summary of the test data. The results of the structural summary are interpreted using existing research data on personality characteristics that have been demonstrated to be associated with different kinds of responses.
With the Rorschach plates (the ten inkblots), the area of each blot which is distinguished by the client is noted and coded—typically as "commonly selected" or "uncommonly selected". There were many different methods for coding the areas of the blots. Exner settled upon the area coding system promoted by S. J. Beck (1944 and 1961). This system was in turn based upon Klopfer's (1942) work.
As pertains to response form, a concept of "form quality" was present from the earliest of Rorschach's works, as a subjective judgment of how well the form of the subject's response matched the inkblots (Rorschach would give a higher form score to more "original" yet good form responses), and this concept was followed by other methods, especially in Europe; in contrast, the Exner system solely defines "good form" as a matter of word occurrence frequency, reducing it to a measure of the subject's distance to the population average.[57]
Rorschach performance assessment system
Main article: Rorschach Performance Assessment System
Rorschach performance assessment system (R-PAS) is a scoring method created by several members of the Rorschach Research Council. They believed that the Exner scoring system was in need of an update, but after Exner's death, the Exner family forbade any changes to be made to the Comprehensive System.[58] Therefore they established a new system: the R-PAS. It is an attempt at creating a current, empirically based, and internationally focused scoring system that is easier to use than Exner's Comprehensive System.[59] The R-PAS manual is intended to be a comprehensive tool for administering, scoring, and interpreting the Rorschach. The manual consists of two chapters that are basics of scoring and interpretation, aimed for use for novice Rorschach users, followed by numerous chapters containing more detailed and technical information.[60]
In terms of updated scoring, the authors only selected variables that have been empirically supported in the literature. To note, the authors did not create new variables or indices to be coded, but systematically reviewed variables that had been used in past systems.[61] While all of these codes have been used in the past, many have been renamed to be more face valid and readily understood. Scoring of the indices has been updated (e.g. utilizing percentiles and standard scores) to make the Rorschach more in line with other popular personality measures.
In addition to providing coding guidelines to score examinee responses, the R-PAS provides a system to code an examinee's behavior during Rorschach administration. These behavioral codes are included as it is believed that the behaviors exhibited during testing are a reflection of someone's task performance and supplements the actual responses given. This allows generalizations to be made between someone's responses to the cards and their actual behavior.
The R-PAS also recognized that scoring on many of the Rorschach variables differed across countries.[61] Therefore, starting in 1997, Rorschach protocols from researchers around the world were compiled.[62] After compiling protocols for over a decade, a total of 15 adult samples were used to provide a normative basis for the R-PAS. The protocols represent data gathered in the United States, Europe, Israel, Argentina and Brazil.
Cultural differences
Comparing North American Exner normative data with data from European and South American subjects showed marked differences in some features, some of which impact important variables, while others (such as the average number of responses) coincide.[63] For instance, texture response is typically zero in European subjects (if interpreted as a need for closeness, in accordance with the system, a European would seem to express it only when it reaches the level of a craving for closeness),[64] and there are fewer "good form" responses, to the point where schizophrenia may be suspected if data were correlated to the North American norms.[65] Form is also often the only determinant expressed by European subjects;[66] while color is less frequent than in American subjects, color-form responses are comparatively frequent in opposition to form-color responses; since the latter tend to be interpreted as indicators of a defensive attitude in processing affect, this difference could stem from a higher value attributed to spontaneous expression of emotions.[64]
The differences in form quality are attributable to purely cultural aspects: different cultures will exhibit different "common" objects (French subjects often identify a chameleon in card VIII, which is normally classed as an "unusual" response, as opposed to other animals like cats and dogs; in Scandinavia, "Christmas elves" (nisser) is a popular response for card II, and "musical instrument" on card VI is popular for Japanese people),[67] and different languages will exhibit semantic differences in naming the same object (the figure of card IV is often called a troll by Scandinavians and an ogre by French people).[68] Many of Exner's "popular" responses (those given by at least one third of the North American sample used) seem to be universally popular, as shown by samples in Europe, Japan and South America, while specifically card IX's "human" response, the crab or spider in card X and one of either the butterfly or the bat in card I appear to be characteristic of North America.[68][69]
Form quality, popular content responses and locations are the only coded variables in the Exner systems that are based on frequency of occurrence, and thus immediately subject to cultural influences; therefore, cultural-dependent interpretation of test data may not necessarily need to extend beyond these components.[70]
The cited language differences mean that it's imperative for the test to be administered in the subject's native language or a very well mastered second language, and, conversely, the examiner should master the language used in the test. Test responses should also not be translated into another language prior to analysis except possibly by a clinician mastering both languages. For example, a bow tie is a frequent response for the center detail of card III, but since the equivalent term in French translates to "butterfly tie", an examiner not appreciating this language nuance may code the response differently from what is expected.[71]
-------------------------------------------------
Inkblots
Below are the ten inkblots of the Rorschach test printed in Rorschach's Rorschach Test – Psychodiagnostic Plates,[72] together with the most frequent responses for either the whole image or the most prominent details according to various authors. Card | Popular responses[73][74][75] | Comments[76][77] | | Beck: | bat, butterfly, moth | Piotrowski: | bat (53%), butterfly (29%) | Dana (France): | butterfly (39%) | | When seeing card I, subjects often inquire on how they should proceed, and questions on what they are allowed to do with the card (e.g. turning it) are not very significant. Being the first card, it can provide clues about how subjects tackle a new and stressful task. It is not, however, a card that is usually difficult for the subject to handle, having readily available popular responses. | | Beck: | two humans | Piotrowski: | four-legged animal (34%, gray parts) | Dana (France): | animal: dog, elephant, bear (50%, gray) | | The red details of card II are often seen as blood, and are the most distinctive features. Responses to them can provide indications about how a subject is likely to manage feelings of anger or physical harm. This card can induce a variety of sexual responses. | | Beck: | two humans (gray) | Piotrowski: | human figures (72%, gray) | Dana (France): | human (76%, gray) | | Card III is typically perceived to contain two humans involved in some interaction, and may provide information about how the subject relates with other people (specifically, response latency may reveal struggling social interactions). | | Beck: | animal hide, skin, rug | Piotrowski: | animal skin, skin rug (41%) | Dana (France): | animal skin (46%) | | Card IV is notable for its dark color and its shading (posing difficulties for depressed subjects), and is generally perceived as a big and sometimes threatening figure; compounded with the common impression of the subject being in an inferior position ("looking up") to it, this serves to elicit a sense of authority. The human or animal content seen in the card is almost invariably classified as male rather than female, and the qualities expressed by the subject may indicate attitudes toward men and authority. Because of this Card IV is often called "The Father Card".[78] | | Beck: | bat, butterfly, moth | Piotrowski: | butterfly (48%), bat (40%) | Dana (France): | butterfly (48%), bat (46%) | | Card V is an easily elaborated card that is not usually perceived as threatening, and typically instigates a "change of pace" in the test, after the previous more challenging cards. Containing few features that generate concerns or complicate the elaboration, it is the easiest blot to generate a good quality response about. | | Beck: | animal hide, skin, rug | Piotrowski: | animal skin, skin rug (41%) | Dana (France): | animal skin (46%) | | Texture is the dominant characteristic of card VI, which often elicits association related to interpersonal closeness; it is specifically a "sex card", its likely sexual percepts being reported more frequently than in any other card, even though other cards have a greater variety of commonly seen sexual contents. | | Beck: | human heads or faces (top) | Piotrowski: | heads of women or children (27%, top) | Dana (France): | human head (46%, top) | | Card VII can be associated with femininity (the human figures commonly seen in it being described as women or children), and function as a "mother card", where difficulties in responding may be related to concerns with the female figures in the subject's life. The center detail is relatively often (though not popularly) identified as a vagina, which makes this card also relate to feminine sexuality in particular. | | Beck: | animal: not cat or dog (pink) | Piotrowski: | four-legged animal (94%, pink) | Dana (France): | four-legged animal (93%, pink) | | People often express relief about card VIII, which lets them relax and respond effectively. Similar to card V, it represents a "change of pace"; however, the card introduces new elaboration difficulties, being complex and the first multi-colored card in the set. Therefore, people who find processing complex situations or emotional stimuli distressing or difficult may be uncomfortable with this card. | | Beck: | human (orange) | Piotrowski: | none | Dana (France): | none | | Characteristic of card IX is indistinct form and diffuse, muted chromatic features, creating a general vagueness. There is only one popular response, and it is the least frequent of all cards. Having difficulty with processing this card may indicate trouble dealing with unstructured data, but aside from this there are few particular "pulls" typical of this card. | | Beck: | crab, lobster, spider (blue) | Piotrowski: | crab, spider (37%, blue), rabbit head (31%, light green), caterpillars, worms, snakes (28%, deep green) | Dana (France): | none | | Card X is structurally similar to card VIII, but its uncertainty and complexity are reminiscent of card IX: people who find it difficult to deal with many concurrent stimuli may not particularly like this otherwise pleasant card. Being the last card, it may provide an opportunity for the subject to "sign out" by indicating what they feel their situation is like, or what they desire to know. |
-------------------------------------------------
Prevalence
United States
The Rorschach test is used almost exclusively by psychologists. In a survey done in the year 2000, 20% of correctional psychologists used the Rorschach while 80% used theMMPI.[8] Forensic psychologists use the Rorschach 36% of the time.[79] In custody cases, 23% of psychologists use the Rorschach to examine a child.[80] Another survey found that 124 out of 161 (77%) of clinical psychologists engaging in assessment services utilize the Rorschach,[81] and 80% of psychology graduate programs teach its use.[9] Another study found that its use by clinical psychologists was only 43%, while it was used less than 24% of the time by school psychologists.[79]
United Kingdom
Many psychologists in the United Kingdom do not trust its efficacy and it is rarely used.[82] Although skeptical about its scientific validity, some psychologists use it in therapy and coaching "as a way of encouraging self-reflection and starting a conversation about the person's internal world."[25] It is still used, however, by such prestigious mental health organisations as the Tavistock Clinic.[83]
Japan
| This article may lend undue weight to certain ideas, incidents, or controversies. Please help to create a more balanced presentation. Discuss and resolve this issue before removing this message. (February 2015) |
Shortly after publication of Rorschach's book, a copy found its way to Japan where it was discovered by one of the country's leading psychiatrists in a second-hand book store. He was so impressed that he started a craze for the test that has never diminished.[84] The Japanese Rorschach Society is by far the largest in the world and the test is "routinely put to a wide range of purposes".[26] In 2012 the test was described, by presenter Jo Fidgen, for BBC Radio 4's programme Dr Inkblot, as "more popular than ever" in Japan.[83]
-------------------------------------------------
Controversy
Some skeptics consider the Rorschach inkblot test pseudoscience,[11][85] as several studies suggested that conclusions reached by test administrators since the 1950s were akin to cold reading.[86] In the 1959 edition of Mental Measurement Yearbook, Lee Cronbach (former President of the Psychometric Society and American Psychological Association)[87] is quoted in a review: "The test has repeatedly failed as a prediction of practical criteria. There is nothing in the literature to encourage reliance on Rorschach interpretations." In addition, major reviewer Raymond J. McCall writes (p. 154): "Though tens of thousands of Rorschach tests have been administered by hundreds of trained professionals since that time (of a previous review), and while many relationships to personality dynamics and behavior have been hypothesized, the vast majority of these relationships have never been validated empirically, despite the appearance of more than 2,000 publications about the test."[88] A moratorium on its use was called for in 1999.[89]
A 2003 report by Wood and colleagues had more mixed views: "More than 50 years of research have confirmed Lee J. Cronbach's (1970) final verdict: that some Rorschach scores, though falling woefully short of the claims made by proponents, nevertheless possess 'validity greater than chance' (p. 636). [...] Its value as a measure of thought disorder in schizophrenia research is well accepted. It is also used regularly in research on dependency, and, less often, in studies on hostility and anxiety. Furthermore, substantial evidence justifies the use of the Rorschach as a clinical measure of intelligence and thought disorder."[90]
Test materials
The basic premise of the test is that objective meaning can be extracted from responses to blots of ink which are supposedly meaningless. Supporters of the Rorschach inkblot test believe that the subject's response to an ambiguous and meaningless stimulus can provide insight into their thought processes, but it is not clear how this occurs. Also, recent research shows that the blots are not entirely meaningless, and that a patient typically responds to meaningful as well as ambiguous aspects of the blots.[10] Reber (1985) describes the blots as merely ".. the vehicle for the interaction .." between client and therapist, concluding: ".. the usefulness of the Rorschach will depend upon the sensitivity, empathy and insightfulness of the tester totally independently of the Rorschach itself. An intense dialogue about the wallpaper or the rug would do as well provided that both parties believe."[91]
Illusory and invisible correlations
In the 1960s, research by psychologists Loren and Jean Chapman showed that at least some of the apparent validity of the Rorschach was due to an illusion.[92][93] At that time, the five signs most often interpreted as diagnostic of homosexuality were 1) buttocks and anuses; 2) feminine clothing; 3) male or female sex organs; 4) human figures without male or female features; and 5) human figures with both male and female features.[93][94] The Chapmans surveyed 32 experienced testers about their use of the Rorschach to diagnose homosexuality. At this time homosexuality was regarded as a psychopathology, and the Rorschach was the most popular projective test.[5] The testers reported that homosexual men had shown the five signs more frequently than heterosexual men.[93][95] Despite these beliefs, analysis of the results showed that heterosexual men were just as likely to report these signs, which were therefore totally ineffective for determining homosexuality.[92][94][95] The five signs did, however, match the guesses students made about which imagery would be associated with homosexuality.[94]
The Chapmans investigated the source of the testers' false confidence. In one experiment, students read through a stack of cards, each with a Rorschach blot, a sign and a pair of "conditions" (which might include homosexuality). The information on the cards was fictional, although subjects were told it came from case studies of real patients.[92] The students reported that the five invalid signs were associated with homosexuality, even though the cards had been constructed so there was no association at all.[94][95] The Chapmans repeated this experiment with another set of cards, in which the association was negative; the five signs were never reported by homosexuals. The students still reported seeing a strong positive correlation.[5][95] These experiments showed that the testers' prejudices could result in them "seeing" non-existent relationships in the data. The Chapmans called this phenomenon "illusory correlation" and it has since been demonstrated in many other contexts.[92][93]
A related phenomenon called "invisible correlation" applies when people fail to see a strong association between two events because it does not match their expectations.[93] This was also found in clinicians' interpretations of the Rorschach. Homosexual men are more likely to see a monster on Card IV or a part-animal, part-human figure in Card V.[5][94]Almost all of the experienced clinicians in the Chapmans' survey missed these valid signs.[5][92] The Chapmans ran an experiment with fake Rorschach responses in which these valid signs were always associated with homosexuality. The subjects missed these perfect associations and instead reported that invalid signs, such as buttocks or feminine clothing, were better indicators.[92]
In 1992, the psychologist Stuart Sutherland argued that these artificial experiments are easier than the real-world use of the Rorschach, and hence they probably underestimated the errors that testers were susceptible to. He described the continuing popularity of the Rorschach after the Chapmans' research as a "glaring example of irrationality among psychologists".[92]
Tester projection
Some critics argue that the testing psychologist must also project onto the patterns. A possible example sometimes attributed to the psychologist's subjective judgement is that responses are coded (among many other things), for "Form Quality": in essence, whether the subject's response fits with how the blot actually looks. Superficially this might be considered a subjective judgment, depending on how the examiner has internalized the categories involved. But with the Exner system of scoring, much of the subjectivity is eliminated or reduced by use of frequency tables that indicate how often a particular response is given by the population in general.[10] Another example is that the response "bra" was considered a "sex" response by male psychologists, but a "clothing" response by females.[96] In Exner's system, however, such a response is always coded as "clothing" unless there is a clear sexual reference in the response.[10]
Third parties could be used to avoid this problem, but the Rorschach's inter-rater reliability has been questioned. That is, in some studies the scores obtained by two independent scorers do not match with great consistency.[97] This conclusion was challenged in studies using large samples reported in 2002.[98]
Validity
When interpreted as a projective test, results are poorly verifiable. The Exner system of scoring (also known as the "Comprehensive System") is meant to address this, and has all but displaced many earlier (and less consistent) scoring systems. It makes heavy use of what factor (shading, color, outline, etc.) of the inkblot leads to each of the tested person's comments. Disagreements about test validity remain: while the Exner proposed a rigorous scoring system, latitude remained in the actual interpretation, and the clinician's write-up of the test record is still partly subjective.[99] Reber (1985) comments ".. there is essentially no evidence whatsoever that the test has even a shred of validity."[91]
Nevertheless, there is substantial research indicating the utility of the measure for a few scores. Several scores correlate well with general intelligence. Interestingly, one such scale is R, the total number of responses; this reveals the questionable side-effect that more intelligent people tend to be elevated on many pathology scales, since many scales do not correct for high R: if a subject gives twice as many responses overall, it is more likely that some of these will seem "pathological". Also correlated with intelligence are the scales for Organizational Activity, Complexity, Form Quality, and Human Figure responses.[100] The same source reports that validity has also been shown for detecting such conditions as schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders; thought disorders; and personality disorders (including borderline personality disorder). There is some evidence that the Deviant Verbalizations scale relates to bipolar disorder. The authors conclude that "Otherwise, the Comprehensive System doesn't appear to bear a consistent relationship to psychological disorders or symptoms, personality characteristics, potential for violence, or such health problems as cancer".[101] (Cancer is mentioned because a small minority of Rorschach enthusiasts have claimed the test can predict cancer.)[102]
Reliability
It is also thought that the test's reliability can depend substantially on details of the testing procedure, such as where the tester and subject are seated, any introductory words, verbal and nonverbal responses to subjects' questions or comments, and how responses are recorded. Exner has published detailed instructions, but Wood et al.[96] cites many court cases where these had not been followed. Similarly, the procedures for coding responses are fairly well specified but extremely time-consuming leaving them very subject to the author's style and the publisher to the quality of the instructions (such as was noted with one of Bohm's textbooks in the 1950s[103]) as well as clinic workers (which would include examiners) being encouraged to cut corners.[104][105]
United States courts have challenged the Rorschach as well. Jones v Apfel (1997) stated (quoting from Attorney's Textbook of Medicine) that Rorschach "results do not meet the requirements of standardization, reliability, or validity of clinical diagnostic tests, and interpretation thus is often controversial".[106] In State ex rel H.H. (1999) where under cross examination Dr. Bogacki stated under oath "many psychologists do not believe much in the validity or effectiveness of the Rorschach test"[106] and US v Battle (2001) ruled that the Rorschach "does not have an objective scoring system."[106]
Population norms | This section may be too technical for most readers to understand. Please help improve this section to make it understandable to non-experts, without removing the technical details. The talk page may contain suggestions. (September 2010) |
Another controversial aspect of the test is its statistical norms. Exner's system was thought to possess normative scores for various populations. But, beginning in the mid-1990s others began to try to replicate or update these norms and failed. In particular, discrepancies seemed to focus on indices measuring narcissism, disordered thinking, and discomfort in close relationships.[107] Lilienfeld and colleagues, who are critical of the Rorschach, have stated that this proves that the Rorschach tends to "overpathologise normals".[107] Although Rorschach proponents, such as Hibbard,[108] suggest that high rates of pathology detected by the Rorschach accurately reflect increasing psychopathology in society, the Rorschach also identifies half of all test-takers as possessing "distorted thinking",[109] a false positive rate unexplained by current research.
The accusation of "over-pathologising" has also been considered by Meyer et al. (2007). They presented an international collaborative study of 4704 Rorschach protocols, obtained in 21 different samples, across 17 different countries, with only 2% showing significant elevations on the index of perceptual and thinking disorder, 12% elevated on indices of depression and hyper-vigilance and 13% elevated on persistent stress overload—all in line with expected frequencies among nonpatient populations.[61]
Applications
The test is also controversial because of its common use in court-ordered evaluations.[citation needed] This controversy stems, in part, from the limitations of the Rorschach, with no additional data, in making official diagnoses from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV).[110] Irving B. Weiner (co-developer with John Exner of the Comprehensive system) has stated that the Rorschach "is a measure of personality functioning, and it provides information concerning aspects of personality structure and dynamics that make people the kind of people they are. Sometimes such information about personality characteristics is helpful in arriving at a differential diagnosis, if the alternative diagnoses being considered have been well conceptualized with respect to specific or defining personality characteristics".[111] In the vast majority of cases, anyway, the Rorschach test wasn't singled out but used as one of several in a battery of tests,[7] and despite the criticism of usage of the Rorschach in the courts, out of 8,000 cases in which forensic psychologists used Rorschach-based testimony, the appropriateness of the instrument was challenged only six times, and the testimony was ruled inadmissible in only one of those cases.[9] One study has found that use of the test in courts has increased by three times in the decade between 1996 and 2005, compared to the previous fifty years.[7] Others however have found that its usage by forensic psychologists has decreased.[112]
Exner and others have claimed that the Rorschach test is capable of detecting suicidality.[113][114][115]
Protection of test items and ethics
Psychologists object to the publication of psychological test material out of concerns that a patient's test responses will be influenced ("primed") by previous exposure. TheCanadian Psychological Association takes the position that, "Publishing the questions and answers to any psychological test compromises its usefulness" and calls for "keeping psychological tests out of the public domain."[116] The same statement quotes their president as saying, "The CPA's concern is not with the publication of the cards and responses to the Rorschach test per se, for which there is some controversy in the psychological literature and disagreement among experts, but with the larger issue of the publication and dissemination of psychological test content".
From a legal standpoint, the Rorschach test images have been in the public domain for many years in most countries, particularly those with a copyright term of up to 70 yearspost mortem auctoris. They have been in the public domain in Hermann Rorschach's native Switzerland since 1992 (70 years after the author's death, or 50 years after the cut-off date of 1942), according to Swiss copyright law.[117][118] They are also in the public domain under United States copyright law[119][120] where all works published before 1923 are considered to be in the public domain.[121] This means that the Rorschach images may be used by anyone for any purpose. William Poundstone was, perhaps, first to make them public in his 1983 book Big Secrets, where he also described the method of administering the test.[citation needed]
The American Psychological Association (APA) has a code of ethics that supports "freedom of inquiry and expression" and helping "the public in developing informed judgments".[122] It claims that its goals include "the welfare and protection of the individuals and groups with whom psychologists work", and it requires that psychologists "make reasonable efforts to maintain the integrity and security of test materials". The APA has also raised concerns that the dissemination of test materials might impose "very concrete harm to the general public". It has not taken a position on publication of the Rorschach plates but noted "there are a limited number of standardized psychological tests considered appropriate for a given purpose".[123] A public statement by the British Psychological Society expresses similar concerns about psychological tests (without mentioning any test by name) and considers the "release of [test] materials to unqualified individuals" to be misuse if it is against the wishes of the test publisher.[124] In his 1998 book Ethics in Psychology, Gerald Koocher notes that some believe "reprinting copies of the Rorschach plates ... and listing common responses represents a serious unethical act" for psychologists and is indicative of "questionable professional judgment".[125] Other professional associations, such as the Italian Association of Strategic Psychotherapy, recommend that even information about the purpose of the test or any detail of its administration should be kept from the public, even though "cheating" the test is held to be practically impossible.[126]
On September 9, 2008, Hogrefe attempted to claim copyright over the Rorschach ink blots during filings of a complaint with the World Intellectual Property Organization against the Brazilian psychologist Ney Limonge. These complaints were denied.[127] Further complaints were sent to two other websites that contained information similar to the Rorschach test in May 2009 by legal firm Schluep and Degen of Switzerland.[128][129]
Psychologists have sometimes refused to disclose tests and test data to courts when asked to do so by the parties citing ethical reasons; it is argued that such refusals may hinder full understanding of the process by the attorneys, and impede cross-examination of the experts. APA ethical standard 1.23(b) states that the psychologist has a responsibility to document processes in detail and of adequate quality to allow reasonable scrutiny by the court.[130]
Controversy ensued in the psychological community in 2009 when the original Rorschach plates and research results on interpretations were published in the "Rorschach test" article on Wikipedia.[131] Hogrefe & Huber Publishing, a German company that sells editions of the plates, called the publication "unbelievably reckless and even cynical of Wikipedia" and said it was investigating the possibility of legal action.[131] Due to this controversy an edit filter was temporarily established on Wikipedia to prevent the removal of the plates.[132]
James Heilman, an emergency room physician involved in the debate, compared it to the publication of the eye test chart: though people are likewise free to memorize the eye chart before an eye test, its general usefulness as a diagnostic tool for eyesight has not diminished.[131] For those opposed to exposure, publication of the inkblots is described as a "particularly painful development", given the tens of thousands of research papers which have, over many years, "tried to link a patient’s responses to certain psychological conditions."[131] Controversy over Wikipedia's publication of the inkblots has resulted in the blots being published in other locations, such as The Guardian[133] and The Globe and Mail.[134] Later that year two psychologists filed a complaint against Heilman with the Saskatchewan medical licensing board, arguing that his uploading of the images constituted unprofessional behavior.[135] In 2012 two articles were published showing consequences of the publication of the images in Wikipedia. The first one studied negative attitudes towards the test generated during the Wikipedia-Rorschach debate,[136] while the second suggested that reading the Wikipedia article could help to fake "good" results in the test.[137]
Publication of the Rorschach images is also welcomed by critics who consider the test to be pseudoscience. Benjamin Radford, editor of Skeptical Inquirer mag