1. Psychology 111 Laboratory in Personality and Clinical Assessment
Jack Wright
Brown University
1/15/2019

2. Agenda Projective methods: Announcements Rorschach Chapman & Chapman
Readings
Groth-Marnat
Lillienfeld
Announcements
FFM/NEO lab reports returned tomorrow
Mr. Dube’s office; 10am
1/15/2019

3. Patterns of Test Usage in Clinical Research
(from Butcher & Rouse, 1996, Annual Review of Psychology)
(see also Groth-Marnat, 2009)
MMPI
BFI=big five inventory; DPI=Dependent Personality Inventory; MCM=Millon Clinical Multiaxial; 16PF=Cattell 16 Personality Factors; Ror=Rorschach; TAT=Thematic Apperception Test; PAI=Personality Assessment Inventory

4. Patterns of Test Usage in Clinical Research
# Studies
(from Butcher & Rouse, 1996, Annual Review of Psychology)
(see also Groth-Marnat, 2009)
BFI=big five inventory; MCM=Millon Clinical Multiaxial; 16PF=Cattell 16 Personality Factors; Ror=Rorschach; TAT=Thematic Apperception Test
1/15/2019

5. History & Development of Rorschach
Criticisms of “Objective” methods
Subject to reporting biases
Content is sometimes obvious
Social desirability, self-enhancement may play role
“Nomothetic” approach constrains content
“Common” traits on which everyone can be scaled
Simple, impoverished content
“Shallow” rather than “deep” (see Dawes, 1998)
Does not provide sufficiently idiographic data
E.g., needs, motives, impulses of the individual
1/15/2019

6. History & Development of Rorschach
Blotto
Parlor game in late 1800s
Players made “creative responses to inkblots”
Hermann Rorschach ( )
Studied art as a secondary-school student
Swiss psychiatrist; interested in developing field of psychoanalysis
Worked at adolescent psychiatric ward
Observed children with certain disorders seemed to give similar answers when describing images
1/15/2019

7. History & Development of Rorschach
Hermann Rorschach ( )
Argued people “project” their feelings and impulses onto ambiguous stimuli
Responses serve as clues to personality structure and dynamics
Published results based on patients and normals in the monograph Psychodiagnostik (1921).
Died at 37 before test development was completed
Current status
second most commonly used test in clinical practice & forensic assessment
1/15/2019

8. History & Development of Rorschach
Rorschach’s colleagues
Beck
Like Rorschach, emphasized criterion-based method
Klopfer
Psychoanalytically-based approach, relying more on the analyst’s interpretation
Wide variation in test conditions and coding
Exner’s “Comprehensive System”
Emphasized standardization of test situation and coding
Claimed to return to actuarial, criterion-based method
Most commonly used system in U.S.
1/15/2019

9. Polarized views of method
Clinical usefulness
Appeal of method that claims to be fake-resistant
Appeal of flexible method that relies heavily on interpretive powers of clinician
“[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.” (Weiner, 1999)
“Exner has almost single handedly rescued a drowning beast and breathed life back into it. The result is the resurrection of perhaps the single most powerful psychometric instrument ever envisioned.” ( 2008) 
1/15/2019

10. Polarized views of method
Scientifically suspect
Unacceptable subjectivity; questionable reliability, validity
"Nobody agrees how to score Rorschach responses objectively. There is nothing to show what any particular response means to the person who gives it. And, there is nothing to show what it means if a number of people give the same response. The ink blots are scientifically useless." (Bartol, 1983).
Projective test of examiner
"The only thing the inkblots do reveal is the secret world of the examiner who interprets them. These doctors are probably saying more about themselves than about the subjects." (Anastasi, 1982).
Impediment to science and practice
“The rate of scientific progress in clinical psychology might well be measured by the speed with which it gets over the Rorschach” Lillienfeld et al. (2000)
1/15/2019

11. Polarized views of method
Unethical application of testing
“Now that I am no longer a member of the APA Ethics Committee, I can express my personal opinion that the use of Rorschach interpretations in establishing an individual's legal status and child custody is the single most unethical practice of my colleagues.  It is done, widely.  Losing legal rights as a result of responding to what is presented as a "test of imagination ," often in a context of "helping," violates what I believe to be a basic ethical principle in this society — that people are judged on the basis of what they do, not on the basis of what they feel, think, or might have a propensity to do.  And being judged on an invalid assessment of such thoughts, feelings, and propensities amounts to losing one's civil rights on an essentially random basis.” (Dawes, 1991)
1/15/2019

12. Rorschach controversies
Rorschach in the media
CBC report on release of materials
(see RealPlayer library on laptop
Macintosh-Rorschach....mov
Lorandos Cross Examination of Expert
part 1
(RealPlayer library on laptop)
On web:
Or play from downloaded copy in RealPlayer library
1/15/2019

13. Rorschach Exercise 1. Overview materials and administration
2. Exercise in pairs
Form teams of 2, administer & take notes
Do not attempt to score
3. Exercise with naïve participant (after class)
Team of 2 administer to participant
Follow test procedures as carefully as possible
Score, as described later
1/15/2019

14. Administration of Rorschach
“Introduction Phase”
Make examinee comfortable
Sit side-by-side, not face-to-face
Avoid comments that might increase anxiety or discomfort about being “tested”
Keep situation ambiguous
Avoid information about what subject should do or say
Instructions:
“In this session, I’m going to show you some inkblots. I will ask you what the inkblot might be.”
1/15/2019

15. Administration “Association Phase” Give first card and ask,
“What might this be?”
If questioned about how to respond, say
“People see all sorts of things in the blots.”
Avoid comments about quantity/type of response, whether subject can rotate the card.
If asked, respond by saying,
“It is up to you to decide.”
Repeat for each card
(Examiner will take notes; more shortly.)

16. Administration “Inquiry Phase”
Begin after all ten cards have been administered.
“OK, we’ve done them all. Now we are going to go back through them. It won’t take long. I want you to help me see what you saw. I’m going to read what you said, and then I want you to show me where on the blot you saw it and what there is that makes it look like that, so that I can see it too. I’d like to see it just like you did, so help me now. Do you understand?”
EG: “What made it look like _____?”
Do NOT ask, “Is it mainly the shape?” etc
1/15/2019

17. Scoring: Decoding protocol into “Sequence of Scores”
Quadrant on card; we will not use.
“Location” , with “developmental quality” subcodes.
“Organizational activity”
Popular responses.
Specific percept
Pairs.
“features responded to”
1/15/2019

18. Scoring: Primary Codes—Location
Symbol
Definition
Criterion W
Whole response
Entire blot is used in the response. All portions must be used. D
Common detail
A frequenty identified area of the blot. (Card-specific; see text) Dd
Unusual detail
An infrequently identified area. (Card- specific; see text) S
Space response
White space is used.
Score ONLY with another location
Symbol, as in WS, DS, DdS.
(see Table 9.1, Groth-Marnat, 2001)
1/15/2019
(based on Exner, 1993, The Rorschach: A comprehensive System, Vol. I)

19. Key terms “Specific form demand”
Primary location codes (W, D, Dd, S) have additional subcodes
“Specific form demand”
“[M]eans that the object being reported generally has a consistent form. The object’s name or title implies a specific shape. For example, man, bird, or butterfly all suggest specific shapes. In other words, specific form demand is equated with specific shape.” (Rose, 2008)
“Developmental quality”
“Refers to the degree of meaningful organization or integration used in the response” (Rose, 2008)
1/15/2019

20. Primary Codes—Developmental Quality
Symbol
Definition
Criterion
“Unitary or discrete portions of the blot are articulated and combined into a single answer. Two or more objects are described as separate but related. At least one of the objects involved must have a specific form demand, or must be described in a manner that creates a specific form demand.” +
Synthesized Response
15 sepcial scores - unusual verba;lizations and aggressive movement
Special indices - reorg and comparisons of scores from different catgeories
Examples: A dog walking among some bushes, a man with a funny hat on, an airplane flying through some clouds, the head of a little girl, wearing a hair ribbon.
(see Table 9.2, Groth-Marnat, 2001)
1/15/2019
(based on Exner, 1993, The Rorschach: A comprehensive System, Vol. I)

21. Primary Codes—Developmental Quality
Symbol
Definition
Criterion +
Synthesized Response
Same as above, except:
“None of the objects involved has a specific form demand, or is articulated in a way to create a specific form demand.”
v/ +
Synthesized Response
Examples:
“Clouds coming together,”
“Some sort of bay with the vegetation on the shore”
“A rock and some dirt around it”
15 sepcial scores - unusual verba;lizations and aggressive movement
Special indices - reorg and comparisons of scores from different catgeories
(see Table 9.2, Groth-Marnat, 2001)
1/15/2019
(based on Exner, 1993, The Rorschach: A comprehensive System, Vol. I)

22. Primary Codes—Developmental Quality
Symbol
Definition
Criterion +
Synthesized Response
“A discrete area of the blot is selected and articulated so as to emphasize the outline and structural features of the object. The object reported has a natural form demand, or the description of the object is such as to create a specific form demand.”
v / +
Synthesized Response o
Ordinary Response
15 sepcial scores - unusual verba;lizations and aggressive movement
Special indices - reorg and comparisons of scores from different catgeories
Examples:
“A fir tree,” “a cat”, “a totem pole,” “a maple leaf,” “a bat”, “a flag”
(see Table 9.2, Groth-Marnat, 2001)
1/15/2019
(based on Exner, 1993, The Rorschach: A comprehensive System, Vol. I)

23. Primary Codes—Developmental Quality
Symbol
Definition
Criterion
“A diffuse or general impression is offered to the blot or blot area in a manner that avoids the necessity of articulating specific outlines or structural features. The object reported has no specific form demand, and the articulation does not introduce a specific form demand for the object reported.” +
Synthesized Response
v / +
Synthesized Response o
Ordinary Response v
15 sepcial scores - unusual verba;lizations and aggressive movement
Special indices - reorg and comparisons of scores from different catgeories
Vague Response
Examples:
“A cloud,” “the sky”, “the colors of sunset,” “some ice”.
(see Table 9.2, Groth-Marnat, 2001)
1/15/2019
(based on Exner, 1993, The Rorschach: A comprehensive System, Vol. I)

24. Primary codes: Determinants (see Table 9.3)
“Refers to the features, style, characteristics, or aspect of the inkblot that the examinee responded to.” (Rose, 2008)
Form
F Form answers
Movement
M Human movement response
FM Animal movement
m Inanimate movement
Chromatic Color
C Pure color
CF Color-Form
FC Form-Color
Cn Color naming
Achromatic color
C’, C’F, FC’
Shading-Texture
T Pure texture
TF Texture-form
FT Form-Texture
15 sepcial scores - unusual verba;lizations and aggressive movement
Special indices - reorg and comparisons of scores from different catgeories

25. Primary codes—Determinants (see Table 9.3)
Shading-Dimension
V Pure vista response.
VF Vista-form response.
FV Form-vista response.
Shading-diffuse
Y Pure shading
YF Shading form
FY Form shading
Form dimension
FD “form-based dimensional “ or “depth” response
Pairs and reflections
(2) Pair response (2 identical objects reported)
rF, Fr Reflected form
15 sepcial scores - unusual verba;lizations and aggressive movement
Special indices - reorg and comparisons of scores from different catgeories
1/15/2019

26. Coding: Form Quality
“How accurately the percept relates to the form” (see Table 9.4)
1/15/2019

27. Content Codes
Type and quantity of specific percepts in the responses (see Table 9-5)
Whole human, H or (H)
Human detail, Hd or (Hd)
Human experience
Whole animal
Animal detail
Anatomy
And others
(continues…)
1/15/2019

28. Popular responses (see Table 9.6)
Responses that are commonly given to each card
EG: Card I: W, “Bat”, “Butterfly”
1/15/2019

29. “Organizational Activity”
“[T]he degree of organization required to integrate the form described in the response.”
“A Z score is assigned to any response that includes form and meets at least one of the following criteria:”
ZW W (whole) response with developmental qualilty of + or v/+
ZA 2 or more adjacent objects in relation
ZD 2 or more distant objects in relation
ZS White space is integrated with other areas
15 sepcial scores - unusual verba;lizations and aggressive movement
Special indices - reorg and comparisons of scores from different catgeories
1/15/2019

30. Scoring of Z values
15 sepcial scores - unusual verba;lizations and aggressive movement
Special indices - reorg and comparisons of scores from different catgeories
1/15/2019

31. Overview of Administration, summary, and interpretation
1. Association & Inquiry
2. List the sequence of codes for each response
3. Record frequencies for each variable
4. Perform calculations required to obtain the ratios, percentages and derived scores
5. Consult norm tables and diagnostic profiles
1/15/2019

32. Practice with Rorschach
Materials you will receive
Set of inkblots
Share if necessary
Note number appears at top left
(non-standard feature)
This will be orientation of person viewing the card
1/15/2019

33. Practice with Rorschach
Procedure for practicing Rorschach
Pair off
Assign one person role of examiner vs. examinee
Suggest you switch after 5 cards if you get that far
Administer cards
Association phase
Inquiry phase
15 minutes
1/15/2019

34. Demonstration of Rorschach
Take notes during inquiry phase
Careful notes on what the person said
Area, color, shading, outlines, motion, or other features that the subject identifies as related to their association
Scoring will occur after the inquiry phase has been completed
More later
1/15/2019

35. Class ends here; material continues in next
Website for help in scoring the Rorschach:
1/15/2019

36. “Structural summary” # times Z score occurred on sequence sheet
Sum of Z scores on that sheet
“Weighted Z, from Table 10.2”
1/15/2019

37. “Structural summary” Other scores not Discussed.
# of each code on previous
# of each developmental quality (DQ) subcode attached
All FQs
1/15/2019
Human Movement
FQs with W or D codes

38. “Structural summary” – “The Core Section” (partial)
R Total number of responses
FM Total number of animal movement (FM responses)
m Total number of inanimate movement response (m)
“Lambda (L)”
“Relates to issues of economizing the use of resources.”
# responses with Pure F determinants
R – F (Total responses – Pure form responses)
Example:
6 Pure F
= .32
25 - 6
1/15/2019

39. “Structural summary” – “The Core Section” (partial)
Erlebnistypus (EB)
Used to measure “the dominant style of decision making activity.”
Based on human movement (M) and chromatic color responses (FC, CF, and C)
WsumC = .5*FC + 1*CF *C
EG: 4 FC, 4CF, and 0 C responses, WsumC = 6.0.
EB is ratio of M:WsumC responses, or 5:6.0 in our example
Experience Actual (EA)
“Available resources”; “Capability to initiate deliberate action in coping situations.”
Sums the components of the EB ratio.
EG: EB=5:6, EA = 11
1/15/2019

40. “Structural summary” Lambda Experience actual Total # responses
EB ratio
Sums of
Animal movement
And inanimate movement
1/15/2019

41. Illustrative Interpretive Questions
What is the quality of the person’s self-focus?
With what frequency and efficiency does the person try to organize his/her environment?
With what balance and passivity does the person interact with his/her environment?
How will the person respond to the affective stimuli of his/her world?
1/15/2019

42. Illustrative interpretations
# of W responses has been described as linked to general intelligence
Movement responses are said to suggest strong impulses or high motor activity
Low response rate said to be associated with mental retardation, depression, and defensiveness
“Confabulatory” responses are taken as signs of a disordered state
1/15/2019

43. Sample “Constellations”
1/15/2019

44. Sample “Constellations”
1/15/2019

45. Sample “Constellations”
1/15/2019

46. Questions about Exner’s CS system
Norm groups
Often unclear how samples were formed
Selective summary statistics provided, but not underlying distributions
Self citation
Most cited studies written by Exner
Not published in peer-reviewed outlet
Access to source studies
Wood, Nezworski, Stejskal (1994)
Each selects one topic (e.g., narcissism)
Writes to E for copies of unpublished studies
No studies provided
1/15/2019

47. Questions about Exner’s CS system
Access to source studies (Wood et al.)
Request repeated, assistant responds:
“The majority of these are not written in a publishable form. Instead, they usually include a brief statement concerning the methodology of the study…”
Further inquiries reveal “statements” were apparently handwritten on sheet of papers or on a computer printouts
Exner subsequently declined when other investigators requested access to raw normative data
Other data integrity questions
Recently disclosed that 221 (41%) of his norm subjects were mistakenly duplicated
Error not detected for over 20 years
1/15/2019

48. Illusory Correlations
Chapman & Chapman
Many projective tests lack reliability and validity
E.g., DAP, Rorschach
Nevertheless, clinicians believe tests are useful
And show substantial consensus is the specific meanings of certain “signs”
Attempt to account for the persistent belief about sign-symptom associations despite lack of empirical evidence
Performed series of 13 experiments
See article
Here, we partially replicate one condition
Do this before discussing details
1/15/2019

49. Chapman & Chapman demonstration
Form pairs
Please, not groups of 4-5
Download C & C demonstration
See
“Chapman demo…ppt”
Avoid talking
Write down responses independently
Complete demonstration before we talk more…
1/15/2019