rorschach

Rorschach Inkblot Test (Exner's Comprehensive System)

Utility Of The Rorschach Inkblot Test Personality Assessment Assessment Of Thought Disorder

History Of The RorschachBlotto: A Popular Parlor Game

Hermann Rorschach Inkblots As Intellectual Assessment, Then Personality Assessment 10 Inkblots Published In Psychodiagnostik In 1921From 20s To 60s Five Competing Interpretative Systems Beck (Samuel Beck) Hertz (Marguerite Hertz) Klopfer* (Bruno Klopfer) Piotrowski (Zigmund Piotrowski) Rappaport (David Rappaport)

History Of The Rorschach (Cont.)John Exners Empirical Studies Of The Rorschach Attempt To Make The Rorschach Inkblot Test More Objective Integration Of The Five Systems Exners Comprehensive System Is The Most Frequently Used System For Interpreting The Rorschach Inkblot Test Rorschach: A Projective Test Projection (Morgan & Murray, 1930s, TAT) Internal Psychological Organization And Needs May Be Projected Onto Ambiguous Stimuli

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 Responses To The Rorschach InkblotsEight (8) Categories Location Developmental Quality Determinants Organizational Activity Form Quality Content Popular Special Scores

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

v/+ = Vague/Synthesized Response Synthesized Response Without 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

See Table Assign Highest Z

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

Interpretation Of The RorschachValidity (R = Responses) Invalid If R < 14 Invalid If R < 17 And Lambda (L) > 1.2 Lambda (L) = Sum F Rs/ Sum Non-F Rs

Interpretation Of The RorschachCoping Stress Tolerance (Current Situation) D = Stress Tolerance (i.e., Effective Coping) In Their Present Circumstance D > 0 Better Stress Tolerance In Current Situation D< 0 -> Poor Stress Tolerance In Current Situation

Stress Tolerance (Typical, Trait-like) Adj D (Adjusted D) = Trait-like Stress Tolerance/Effective Coping Adj D > 0 Better Stress Tolerance (Typical, Trait-like) Adj D < 0 -> Poor Stress Tolerance (Typical, Trait-like)

Interpretation Of The RorschachPersonality Style (EB) EB = 2.0 Or More, Then Introversive Style (e.g., 6:2) EB = 0.5 Or Less, The Extratensive Style (e.g., 2:6) 0.5 < EB < 2.0, Then Ambitent Style (e.g., 4:5)

EB = Sum M Responses/Weighted Sum Chromatic Responses

Coping Resources (EA) eb = FM+m/Shading Responses

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

Interpretation Of The RorschachProcessing (Information Processing) Cognitive Initiative And Complexity Zf = # Of Responses That Received Z Scores Normals: Mean Is 40-50% Of All Responses Low Zf = Low Intelligence Or Limited Mental Involvement In The Testing Procedure High Zf = Mental Involvement In The Testing Procedure, Intelligent

Organizational Activity (Zd) Zd < -3 :Impulsive Decision-Making When Facing Social Problems, Poor Impulse Control Zd > +3 :Effortful Processing Of Social Problems (Overincorporation, Excessively Prudent Decision-Making)

Interpretation Of The RorschachCognitive Rigidity And Dysfunction PSV = 1 Normal Range Rigidity PSV = 2 .Neuropsych Consult Or Trait Compulsivity CONFAB > 0 : Low IQ Or Cognitive Impairment; Neuropsych Testing Indicated a:p (Ratio Of Active To Passive Responses) Cognitive Inflexibility Indicated By Ratios Greater Than 3:1 Or Greater Than 1:3

Conventionality P (Populars) Most Normals: 5-8 Populars Low P (P 8) And Lambda < 1.5: Conventional, Highly Socialized

Interpretation Of The RorschachPerceptual Accuracy (Reality Testing/SocialPerception) F+% # Of Pure F Responses With + Or O Form Quality/ # Of All Pure F Responses May Be Interpreted Only If At Least 8 Pure F Responses And Lambda Of Approximately .70 If F+% Is .60 Or Less Then Suggests Poor Perceptual Accuracy (i.e., Poor Reality Testing)

X+% # Of All Responses With Form Quality Of + Or O/ # Of All Responses X+% > .90: Hyper-conventional, Conforming X+% .15 -> Issues With Reality Testing If X-% > .20 -> Clinically Important Problem With Reality Testing

Interpretation Of The RorschachIdeation (Thought Disorder) Sum6 (Sum Of Big Six Special Scores) Sum6 >5 ::: Likely Thought Disorder

WSum6 (Weighted Sum Of Big Six Special Scores) WSum6 > 11 :::: Likely Thought Disorder

M Qual (Form Quality Of M Responses) M- = 1 Or 2 :: Probability Of Thought Disorder M- > 2 ::: Pronounced Thought Disorder; Delusional Ideation Is Very Likely

Interpretation Of The RorschachAffect FC:CF+C >1:3 Or Greater .Potential For Intense Displays Of Emotion > 3:1 Or GreaterAbove Average Effort To Control Displays Of Emotion

Afr (Affective Ratio) Afr > .85 seeks emotional stimulation Afr < .44 avoidant of emotional stimuli

Interpretation Of The Rorschach Self-Perception (Self Image) (3r + (2)/R) = Egocentricity Index > .42 Suggests Self-Centeredness, Narcissism < .31 Suggests Low Self Esteem

Interpretation Of The RorschachOppositionality S (White Space Responses)S = 1 Or 2 Typical Need For Independence S > 3 Trait-like Oppositionality, Possible Anti-authoritarian Attitude

Interpretation Of The RorschachIndices S-con: 8+ = High Suicide Potential; 6-7 Eval Suicidality DEPI (Depression Index): 5 Suggests Features, 6-7Is More Definitive

SCZI (Schizophrenia Index): 4 Then SZ HighlyProbable, 5-6 Is More Definitive

CDI (Coping Deficit Index): 4-5+ Poor SocialRelationships/Poor Coping Ability OBS POS Then OCD Or OCPD Likely HVI (Hypervigilance Index) : POS Avoidant Of Social Relationships, Possible Paranoia