Failure of Rorschach-Comprehensive-System-based testimony to be admissible under the Daubert-Joiner-Kumho standard.

Abstract

The Comprehensive System for the Rorschach (RCS) is currently the subject of intense scientific criticism. The normative data for many RCS scores are seriously in error and tend to make normal individuals appear maladjusted. Reliability is inadequate for many RCS scores, and validity for the great majority of RCS scores has not been adequately demonstrated. In addition, a substantial number of Rorschach Workshops studies, cited by B. Ritzler, R. Erard, and G. Pettigrew (2002) as supportive of the RCS, are unavailable for examination. Finally, B. Ritzler et al. misinterpret central issues of the relevant legal analysis, including crucial legal standards. The RCS clearly fails to meet the standards for admissibility set forth in the Daubert, Joiner, and Kumho decisions. Should expert testimony based on the widely used Comprehensive System for the Rorschach (RCS) be admissible in court? In an earlier article that appeared in this journal (Grove & Barden, 1999), two of us discussed the admissibility of testimony from mental health experts. We concluded that some types of testimony, commonly offered by mental health professionals, do not meet the current standards that govern the admissibility of scientific evidence in federal and many state courts (Daubert v.

Clinical Psychological Evaluations for Pre-Employment Selection

“…In addition, it is important to only include predictors with standardized scoring procedures that are based on objective criteria, rather than those that rely on the subjective judgment of the clinical psychologist (Ben-Porath et al 2011;Borum et al 2003;Butcher 1999b, cited in Butcher, Ones, andCullen, 2006). We believe projective assessments are inappropriate in this context because of their poor reliability and validity data, subjective interpretation systems, lack of appropriate normative samples, lack of validity scales, and tendency to overpathologize even "normal" individuals (Grove et al 2002). The use of objective tests, however, will help to improve the defensibility of the scoring procedure, as interpretation will not rely solely on clinical judgment (Butcher 1999b, cited in Butcher et al 2006.…”

A Critical Examination of the Suitability and Limitations of Psychological Tests in Family Court

“…These flawed norms often lead psychologists to overestimate examinees’ psychopathology (Shaffer, Erdberg, & Haroian, 1999; Wood, Nezworski, Lilienfeld, & Garb, 2003; Wood, Nezworski, & Stejskal, 1996). For example, several studies have demonstrated that the Rorschach CS identifies healthy adults as maladjusted or even afflicted with severe mental illnesses such as schizophrenia (Grove, Barden, Garb, & Lilienfeld, 2002). Healthy examinees may appear to have profound mental abnormalities related to perceptions, logical thinking, and emotional functioning.…”

The Responsible Use of Psychological Testing in Child Custody Evaluations: Selection of Tests

“…The literature also includes analyses of several psychological tests regarding their admissibility under different legal criteria (i.e., Frye test, Daubert's four-prong standard) and psychological issues of test selection. This includes Human Figure Drawings (Lally, 2001), the MCMI-III (McCann, 2002;see Rogers, Salekin, & Sewell, 2000, for an opposing view;and Dyer & McCann, 2000, for a reply), the MMPI-2 (see, e.g., Otto, 2002;Otto & Collins, 1995), the Rorschach (Gacono, Evans, & Viglione, 2002;McCann, 1998; for an opposing view, see, e.g., Grove & Barden, 1999;Grove, Barden, Garb, & Lilienfeld, 2002;Wood, Nezworski, Lilienfeld, & Garb, 2003; and for a reply see, e.g., Ritzler, Erard, & Pettigrew, 2002a, 2002b, and child custody-specific tests (e.g., the Bricklin scales, ASPECT, Parent-Child Relationship Inventory; see Ackerman, this volume;Connell, this volume;Otto et al, 2000;Yañez & Fremouw, 2004) and other parenting assessment instruments (i.e., Child Abuse Potential Inventory, Parenting Stress Index; Yañez & Fremouw, 2004).…”