Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Hermann Rorschach Inkblots As Intellectual Assessment, Then Personality Assessment 10 Inkblots Published In Psychodiagnostik In 1921
From 20s To 60s Five Competing Interpretative Systems
Beck (Samuel Beck) Hertz (Marguerite Hertz) Klopfer* (Bruno Klopfer) Piotrowski (Zigmund Piotrowski) Rappaport (David Rappaport)
Response Process Encoding Of Ambiguous Stimulus -> LTM/Percepts/Introjects -> Filter /Editing (Concious/Unconcious) -> Response Potential Effect Of The Examiner On The Examinees Responses
Administration
Two Phases Of Administration
Free Association Phase Inquiry Phase
Record Responses Verbatim During Both Phases Side-By-Side Seating Tester Language
We Are Going To Do The Inkblot Test. (If Pt Asks -> It Will Help Me Understand You Better) Free Association Phase Card I What Might This Be? Must Give At Least Two Responses To Card I (Look Some More, Take Your Time, You Will Find Something Else) If Card I Responses > 6, Stop Before 7th And No More Than 6 On Cards 2 - 10 If Card I Responses < 6, No Limit On Number Of Responses For Subsequent Cards Inquiry Phase Help Me To See It, Just Like You Saw It Re-Read Sss Response Verbatim, Then Record What They Say Verbatim
Coding (Cont.)
Location
W = Whole Inkblot D = Common Detail Dd = Uncommon Detail S = Use Of White Space (Tack It One.g., DdS)
Coding (Cont.)
Developmental Quality Reflects Cognitive Processing, Mental Complexity And Flexibility Possibilities
+ = Synthesized Response
Two Or More Objects, Separate But Related, At Least One Of The Objects Has A Specific Form Demand
o = Ordinary Response
Response With Specific Form Demand
v = Vague Response
Diffuse Or General Impression Is Expressed (No Form Demand) e.g., Evil, Love
Coding (Cont.)
Determinants
Three Classes
Form Color Shading
See Table 10
Coding (Cont.)
Organizational Activity (Z)
Assigned To Any Response That Includes Form
W
A W Response With A Developmental Quality Coding Of +, o, Or v/+
Adjacent Detail
Response Meaningfully Integrates Two Or More Adjacent Detail Areas
Nonadjacent Detail
Response Meaningfully Integrates Two Or More Nonadjacent Detail Areas
White Space
White Space Integrated With Other Parts Of The Inkblot
Coding (Cont.)
Form Quality
The Extent To Which The Response Fits (Can Be Seen From) The Inkblot + = Superior-Overelaborated O = Ordinary U = Unusual - = Minus
Category Descriptions in Table 4 FQ Ratings Per Response In Working Tables (Ch. IX Of Manual)
Coding (Cont.)
Content
See Table 5
Coding (Cont.)
Popular Responses
See Table 6
Coding (Cont.)
Special Scores
See Table 6 Deviant Verbalization (DV)
Odd Language Two Possible Characteristics
Neologism (Idiosyncratic Word Usage) A Cat Sticking Her Purr Up Looks Like Someones Public Arch Redundancy A Trio Of Three People Two Twin Lips
Coding (Cont.)
Special Scores (Cont.)
See Table 6 Deviant Response (DR)
Responses With Two Possible Characteristics
Inappropriate Phrases (Unnecessary Phases) Its A Bird, But I Was Hoping To See A Butterfly. An Abstract Of President Bush, If You Look At It From A Republican Perspective. Circumstantial Responses (Response With Inappropriate Elaboration Or Rambling Language) It Looks Like A Map Of Two ContinentsI Can Tell This Because Ive Traveled To The Middle East And It Is Quite Hot There Even Hotter Than Bakersfield In August
Coding (Cont.)
Special Scores (Cont.)
See Table 6
Incongruous Combination (INCOM)
Aspects Of The Inkblot Are Inappropriately Merged Into A Single, Unrealistic Object
A Frog With A Mustache A Woman With The Head Of A Chicken
Coding (Cont.)
Special Scores (Cont.)
See Table 6
Fabulized Combination (FABCOM)
The Percept Reported Involves Two Objects In A Relationship That Is Inconsistent With Reality
A Frog Holding A Baseball Bat A Woman, You Can See Her Heart Pumping
Coding (Cont.)
Special Scores (Cont.)
See Table 6
Inappropriate Logic (ALOG)
Without Prompting, The Subject Uses Strained Reasoning To Justify The Answer
It Must Be The North Pole Because It Is At The Top Of The Card He Must Be A Coal Miner Because He Is All Black
Coding (Cont.)
Special Scores (Cont.)
See Table 6
Perseveration (PSV)
Within Card Perseveration
Same Location, DQ, Determinants, FQ, Content, etc.
Content Perseveration
Subject Identifies The Percept As The Same One Seen Previously
Mechanical Perseveration
Card I A Bat, Card II A Bat, Card III A Bat
Coding (Cont.)
Special Scores (Cont.)
See Table 6 Confabulation (CONFAB)
Subject Initially Focuses On A Detail Of The Inkblot, Then Generalizes A Response Based On That Detail To A Larger Area Or The Entire Inkblot Generalized Response Hinges On The Initially Identified Detail I Saw The Crab And Then I Knew It Was An Ocean Scenesee Theres A Lobster And Some Algae And Its A Claw..Its A Lobster
EA = Sum M Responses + Weightd Sum Chromatic Response Present Distress (eb) FM = Unmet Internal Needs m = Situation-Determined Distress Y > 1 Suggests Helplessness Induced By Situational Stress T = Trait-like Need For Affection C = Irritation Caused By Emotional Constraint V = Ruminative Introspection
Conventionality
P (Populars)
Most Normals: 5-8 Populars Low P (P <5): Low Conventionality, Undersocialized, Individualist High P (P > 8) And Lambda < 1.5: Conventional, Highly Socialized
X+%
# Of All Responses With Form Quality Of + Or O/ # Of All Responses X+% > .90: Hyper-conventional, Conforming X+% <.70: Over-commitment To Individuality, Poor Reality Testing (Poor Perceptual Accuracy), Or Difficulty Modulating Emotional Experiences
X-%
# Of All Responses With - Form Quality/ All Responses If X-% > .15 -> Issues With Reality Testing If X-% > .20 -> Clinically Important Problem With Reality Testing