Download
1 / 16
260 likes | 1.04k Views
Maggie Selander, Julia Martin, Marie Ware, Caroline Lopez, Lynn. The Rorschach. Introduction. Central Assumption: Stimuli from the environment are organized by a person’s specific needs, motives, conflicts, & by certain perceptual “sets”
E N D
Maggie Selander, Julia Martin, Marie Ware, Caroline Lopez, Lynn The Rorschach
Introduction • Central Assumption: • Stimuli from the environment are organized by a person’s specific needs, motives, conflicts, & by certain perceptual “sets” • exaggerated when faced with ambiguous stimuli like ink-blots! • Person must draw from their own personal internal images, ideas, and relationships to create a response. • Purpose: • To asses the structure of personality, with particular emphasis on how individuals construct their experience & the meanings assigned to their own perceptual experiences • Provides information on variables such as: motivations, response tendencies, cognitive operations, affectivity, & personal/interpersonal perceptions
History • Many inkblot-type tests had existed long before The Rorschach • Da Vinci & Botticelli were interested in determining how a person’s interpretation of ambiguous designs reflected their personality • A popular game in the late 1800’s required players to make creative responses to inkblots • Hermann Rorschach published first 10 cards in 1921 • 1st extensive empirically based system to score & interpret responses to a standardized set of cards • Originally intended to use the test to note the characteristic responses of different types of populations • Initial norms were used to help differentiate between clinical and normal populations • Rorschach was only minimally concerned with the symbolic interpretation of contents. • Many of his original concepts & scoring categories still used
History • Unfortunately Rorschach died shortly after publishing his work, Psychodiagnostic, at age 37 • Without the guidance & research of “the founding father” the test’s continued development was taken up by person’s with different backgrounds than Rorschach & each other • By 1957, 5 Rorschach systems were in use, the most popular being those developed by Beck & Klopfer • Represented polarized schools of though & were often in conflict.
History • S. J. Beck (1937) adhered closely to original format for coding & scoring • Emphasized the perceptual-cognitive process in which respondents structure & organize their perceptions into meaningful responses • Likely to reflect how they respond to their world in general • B. Klopfer (1937) closely aligned to theories of personality developed by Freud & Jung • Emphasized the symbolic content & experiential nature of the respondent’s Rorschach contents • Responses are fantasy products triggered by the inkblots and reflect perceived aspects of their world • Piotrowski, Hertz, & Rapaport’s versions represented “middle-ground” between the Klopfer and Beck but were not as popular
History • Exner (1969) provided a comparative analysis of the 5 different systems • Concluded “the notion of the Rorschach was more myth than reality” • The 5 systems used the same verbal instructions • Only 2 required identical seating arrangements • Each had developed their own format for scoring resulting in different interpretations • The wide range of approaches resulted in numerous detrimental practices • Lacked consistency in the administration, scoring, and interpretation of contents • Difficulty recruiting subjects, experimenter bias, statistical complexities of data analysis, inadequate control groups, insufficient normative data • Research on & the clinical use of the Rorschach was seriously flawed
History • Exner & his colleagues began the collection of a broad normative database and the development of an integrated system of scoring/interpretation • Established clear guidelines for seating, verbal instructions, recording, & inquiry by the examiner regarding the examinee responses • Scoring category based on both empirical validation (min. of .85 level for inter-scorer reliability) & commonality across the 5 different systems • Final product 1st published in 1974, The Rorschach: A Comprehensive System • 2nded (1986), 3rded (1993), and 4thed (2003) • A 2nd volume relating to current research & interpretation has been released in two editions (Exner, 1978, 1991) • Additionally, two editions on the assessment of children/adolescents have been published
The Rorschach: A Comprehensive System • The most recent publication has included 450 contemporary protocols from persons, 18 to 65+, split evenly between males and females, with a wide range of education & ethnicities • Most research studies from the past 20 years use this system & is the most frequently taught version in graduate schools • Exner’s work to empirically validate the Rorschach with a comprehensive system has increased its acceptance & status
The Rorschach: A Comprehensive System • Exner has been responsible for much of the leadership and advances regarding the Rorschach • His death in 2006 opens up the possibility for significant changes in his system • However, the merits of nearly all aspects of the test continue to be challenged including: • Inter-scorer reliability • Norms • Temporal stability • Accuracy of meta-analysis that have previously found support for the test
Reliability: The Comprehensive System • Exner only included scoring categories that had an inter-rater reliability of .85 or higher • Some controversy has resulted concerning these values, other researchers found greater variability • A (2000) study found that nearly half of the categories for the comprehensive system had excellent reliability ratings (>.81) • 1/3 had substantial reliability (>.61) • 1/4 had less than adequate (<.61) • Sample sizes were small, greater variability would be expected
Reliability: The Comprehensive System • The most recent & rigorous study, G. Meyer et all (2002) concluded that overall the Comprehensive System has excellent inter-scorer reliability ranging from .82 to .97 • If scorers are appropriately trained • Interpretive agreement among experienced clinicians ranged between .76 to .89 • Test-retest reliabilities somewhat variable • Of 41 (out of 125) variables over a 1yr interval found reliability ranging from .26 to .92 (most between .81 & .89) • Exner - low reliabilities were due to the variables being affected by the changeable state (not trait) characteristics of the person • Study supported that some variables or valid indicators for change following psychotherapy • Many of the Rorschach’s variables are untested for reliability
