I examined Rorschach assessment of personality changes following psychotherapy. I conducted a comprehensive literature search to find all studies using the Rorschach method at least twice for the same participant in connection with psychotherapy. I conducted meta-analyses for 38 samples, and I performed regression analyses to identify moderating factors. Across all Rorschach scores, the total weighted sample effect size was r = .26, and nearly half the variables obtained effect sizes higher than .30. Several moderating factors were found. Most important, effect sizes increased with longer and more intensive therapy. More concern for interscorer reliability was associated with larger effect sizes, whereas a higher degree of scorer blinding was associated with smaller effect size magnitudes. Predicted levels of change based on the regression models indicated substantial increases in effect size with longer therapies. The data indicate that many elements in the Rorschach are valid indicators of change despite the poor reputation the method has acquired within psychotherapy research.
The temporal stabilities of the Rorschach method scoring systems were investigated. A comprehensive literature search was conducted to find all test-retest studies, both regular and from control samples in therapy evaluation studies. Meta-analyses were conducted for samples, individual entries, and variables in 36 samples. Separate analyses were made for 10 samples using the Comprehensive System (CS; Exner, 1993). The temporal stability was high, especially those obtained from regression model predictions. The CS consistently shows higher stability than other systems, whereas increasing retest intervals leads to decreasing stability. Shortcomings of the available studies are highlighted and discussed, and recommendations are given for design and methodology.
We examined discriminant and convergent validity of theoretically relevant Rorschach Comprehensive System (CS) variables (Exner, 2003) and Meloy and Gacono's (1992) aggression variables in distinguishing between imprisoned violent offenders (VO) who were psychopathic (P-VO) and nonpsychopathic (NP-VO) under psychiatric treatment, schizophrenic inpatients (ISs), and university students (USs). A total of 7 of 12 variables discriminated significantly between P-VO and NP-VO, which suggests more aggressive, cognitive, and interpersonal disturbances among P-VO. We also found significant differences between VOs, ISs, and USs. Logistic regression analyses revealed that AgPast accumulated incrementally in the classification of P-VO versus NP-VO, and AgC accumulated incrementally in the classification of VO versus IS when entered after CS variables. The findings support the view that psychopathy is a distinctive form of antisocial personality disorder (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders; American Psychiatric Association, 1994) organized at a more severe pathological level.
We tested 140 male candidates at the Naval Special Forces (NFS) of Norway on the Rorschach (Exner, 2003; Rorschach, 1921/1942) and the Norwegian version of the Big Five personality dimensions (Engvik & Føllesdal, 2005). Rorschach variables significantly correlated with training completion (effect sizes of r(e) = .14-.25), whereas none of the Big Five factors or facets did. The combination of Rorschach and Big Five variables framed in the illusory mental health concept provided strong predictive ability. Testing under stress produced slightly higher predictive validity coefficients between the Rorschach variables and pass-fail than under calm testing. The findings support the results of Hartmann, Sunde, Kristensen, and Martinussen (2003), indicating that Rorschach variables and indications of good mental health may be valid predictors of NFS training.
Numerous meta-analyses and reviews have been conducted on the effectiveness of psychological treatment of sexual offenders in reducing recidivism, but no meta-analysis has been done on sexual offenders against children (SOAC) specifically. A moderate treatment effect has been shown in several evaluations of general sexual offenders, while many scholars maintain that the question remains unanswered until an adequate number of effectiveness studies with a strong research design have been carried out. In this meta-analysis, we evaluated 14 studies selected and coded according to Collaborative Outcome Data Committee (CODC) criteria. They included 1,421 adult offenders in psychotherapy and 1,509 nontreated controls, with a minimum average follow-up period of 3 years, published in peer-reviewed journals in 1980 or later. Recidivism was defined as rearrest or reconviction. Study quality was classified into strong, good, weak or rejected. The analysis revealed a treatment effect size of r = .03 for nine studies evaluated as Good or Weak, while all studies yielded an effect size of r = .08, including five studies classified as Rejected. The results show that the available research cannot establish any effect of treatment on SOAC. Despite a large amount of research, only a tiny fraction of studies meet a minimum of scientific standards, and even fewer provide sensible and useful data from which it is possible to draw conclusions.
Objective: We report on the validation of the Norwegian version of the Inventory of Problems-29 (IoP-29) using an experimental simulation setup with honest responders and responders feigning depression. Method: The sample consisted of 275 participants recruited by convenience by spreading invitational links to participate in the study on social media. They were randomly assigned to either an experimental simulation or an honest condition with the IoP-29. Participants in both conditions were asked to confirm whether they had followed the instructions or not. The honest respondents (n = 138) were asked to respond to the IoP-29 as honestly as they could, whereas the experimental simulators (n = 137) were told to simulate depression based on a case vignette and descriptions of depressive symptoms. Results: We found that participants in the simulation group scored significantly higher than the control group (d = 2.39, p < .000). We found no significant effects from age, gender, or education on the resulting scores. Area under the curve (AUC) for IoP-29 was .94 (SE = .01), meaning a good ability to separate the two conditions. The cutoff for the IoP-False Disorder Score ≥.50 yielded sensitivity = .77, specificity = .93, positive predictive power = .91, negative predictive power = .81, and an overall correct classification = .85. Conclusions: The Norwegian version of IoP-29 demonstrated good validity in discriminating between experimental simulators of depression and a nonclinical control group.
Public Significance StatementOur study shows that the Norwegian translation of Inventory of Problems-29 can effectively discriminate between honest nonclinical responders and feigners of depression. This study marks the first step of the validation of the Norwegian IoP-29 version for clinical use.
All available studies on the Wartegg Zeichen Test (WZT; Wartegg, 1939) were collected and evaluated through a literature overview and a meta-analysis. The literature overview shows that the history of the WZT reflects the geographical and language-based processes of marginalization where relatively isolated traditions have lived and vanished in different parts of the world. The meta-analytic review indicates a high average interscorer reliability of rw = .74 and high validity effect size for studies with clear hypotheses of rw = .33. Although the results were strong, we conclude that the WZT research has not been able to establish cumulative knowledge of the method because of the isolation of research traditions.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.