Test Anxiety and Performance on Projective Tests

Doris, John M.; Sarason, Seymour B.; Berkowitz, Lawrence

doi:10.2307/1126769

Cited by 8 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is significant that these studies and others (Barger & Sechrest, 1961;Doris, Sarason, & Berkowitz, 1963;Holtzman et al, 1961, p. 180) generally fail to show strong relationships between questionnaire-and rating-assessed anxiety and HIT indexes. These and other findings have prompted Holtzman et al (1961) to conclude:…”

Section: Diagnosismentioning

confidence: 73%

The Holtzman Inkblot Technique.

Gamble¹

1972

Psychological Bulletin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

After a brief description of the rationale, construction, and structure of the Holtzman Inkblot Technique, this study critically reviews 10 years (1959-1969) of research with this instrument. An impressive body of positive findings is in evidence, but many more studies are needed in most areas covered by this review. The various technical refinements and extensions of this instrument that have been produced should facilitate the appearance of much needed future research. The dearth of relevant studies renders an evaluative comparison with the Rorschach impossible at this time. Implications of certain issues raised by R. Schafer in 1948, M. D. Ainsworth in 19S4, and R. Holt in 1968 in relation to Rorschach validity studies are discussed in reference to research with the Holtzman technique.

show abstract

Section: Diagnosismentioning

confidence: 73%

The Holtzman Inkblot Technique.

Gamble¹

1972

Psychological Bulletin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although the tasks in the present study were counterbalanced in keeping with principles of good experimental design, it was not expected that order of task administration would affect the results. Others who have investigated test anxiety have also been plagued with unexpected order effects (Doris & Sarason, 1955;Doris, Sarason, & Berkowitz, 1963;Handler & Sarason, 1952) and no adequate explanations have as yet been offered which can incorporate all of the findings. Results involving order in the present study suggest the possibility that LA subjects may become less interested and motivated the longer they are kept in the task situation, while the HA subjects become more anxious with time.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of test anxiety on children's performance as a function of instructions and type of task.

McCoy¹

1965

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

2 tasks were administered to 28 high test-anxious (HA) and 28 low testanxious (LA) 4th-grade boys. 4 of each group received test instructions and i received game instructions. The 1st hypothesis was that HA Ss perform as if being tested regardless of instructions. On a simple gamelike tracing task, LA Ss in the test condition made fewer errors than LA Ss in the game condition, while HA Ss in the 2 conditions did not differ. The 2nd hypothesis was that fear of failure is basic to the arousal of test anxiety. On a 2-part drawing task Ss were required to make "a picture" and to draw a "poskon." No anxiety group differences were found for the free drawing; in drawing a "poskon"-the failure task-HA Ss made smaller drawings and verbalized less. In addition, HA Ss tended to switch colors and materials more in the test than in the game condition while the reverse was true for LA Ss.Research supporting the theory of test anxiety developed by the workers at Yale (Sarason, Davidson, Lighthall, Waite, & Ruebush, 1960) indicates that test anxiety in children interferes with performance on testlike tasks (

show abstract

“…However, no complex indices (variables resulting from the combination of multiple scores) were developed, as in the Comprehensive System (e.g., Blends), derived from the combination of multiple HIT variables. Consistent with the first approach, Doris et al (1963) took the Rorschach's Form Quality variable, which assesses the degree of correspondence between the form of the concept and the form of the corresponding inkblot, and rated it using a 4-point scale, from very good (4) to very poor (1). The same study found that second and third-grade children belonging to different groups based on their anxiety levels (measured with the Test Anxiety Scale for Children) differed on the Form Level rating.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Validity of the Holtzman Inkblot Technique: New Indices

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The present study examines the validity of 11 new Holtzman Inkblot Technique indices. These were chosen from Exner’s Comprehensive System (RCS) indices using two criteria: first, they had to be valid according to meta-analysis, and second, they must be computed using the HIT standard scoring system.Methods: Both techniques were administrated with a retest interval from 1 to 7days to a sample of 139 subjects (63 males and 76 females) from the general population. The validity of the new indices was studied through Pearson correlation (r) with the corresponding RCS indices.Results: Nine of the 11 new indices (R-HIT, F%-HIT, M-HIT, m-HIT, C'-HIT, Blends-HIT, PureH-HIT, DQ+HIT, and X-%-HIT) showed significant correlations with Rorschach scales, confirming our hypotheses. The correlation ranged from a minimum of 0.144 to a maximum of 0.414.Conclusions: The results provide support for the validity of the new HIT indices and have important implications for both clinical and research fields.

show abstract

Test Anxiety and Performance on Projective Tests

Cited by 8 publications

References 8 publications

The Holtzman Inkblot Technique.

The Holtzman Inkblot Technique.

Effects of test anxiety on children's performance as a function of instructions and type of task.

The Validity of the Holtzman Inkblot Technique: New Indices

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About