The Effect of CS Administration or an R-Optimized Alternative on R–PAS Variables: A Meta-Analysis of Findings From Six Studies

Abstract

Controlling the number of Rorschach responses (R) as a method to reduce variability in the length of records has stimulated controversy among researchers for many years. Recently, the Rorschach Performance Assessment System (R-PAS; Meyer, Viglione, Mihura, Erard, & Erdberg, 2011 ) introduced an R-Optimized method to reduce variability in R. Using 4 published and 2 previously unpublished studies (N = 713), we examine the extent to which 51 Comprehensive System-based scores on the R-PAS profile pages are affected as a result of receiving Comprehensive System (CS; Exner, 2003 ) administration versus a version of R-Optimized administration. As hypothesized, R-the intended target of R-Optimized administration-showed reliable weighted average differences across each method of administration. As expected, its mean modestly increased and its standard deviation notably decreased. Also as hypothesized, the next largest effects were decreases in the variability (SD) of 2 variables directly related to R, R8910% and Complexity. No other reliable differences were observed. Therefore, because R-Optimized administration does not notably modify the existing CS-based normative values for other profiled R-PAS variables, the data do not support concerns that R-Optimized administration notably modifies the Rorschach task or that existing CS research data would not generalize to R-PAS. However, because R-Optimized administration reduces variability in R, it allows a single set of norms to apply readily to more people.

Rorschach Performance Assessment System (R-PAS) for assessing disordered thought and perception.

“…These protocols formed two sets of norms: 1,396 protocols to use with CS administration procedures and 640 protocols to use with R-PAS modified administration that controls for excess variability in the number of responses. Research shows that the two forms of administration lead to identical norms for all variables except for the intended targets of reducing response variability and slightly more responses overall (Hosseininasab et al, 2019;Pianowski et al, 2021). These norms are most applicable to people in the United States and other developed countries rather than to people from countries with much lower education levels (Meyer et al, 2017).…”

The Rorschach and Violent Crime

“…Huprich and colleagues ( 2004) examined Rorschach Oral Dependency (ROD) scores and Gacono and Meloy's (1994) aggressive content scores, and their cooccurrence, in psychopathic violent offenders, sexual homicide perpetrators, and nonviolent sexual offenders against children (Huprich et al, 2004). ROD scores, expressed as a percentage of R, were significantly lower in psychopathic offenders compared with the other two offender groups.…”

“…There were no meaningful differences between the three groups on AgC; however, sexual homicide perpetrators consistently gave the highest number of AgPast and AgPot scores of the three groups. The authors conclude that the ROD scale provides an implicit assessment of dependency needs that allows evaluators to better understand the underlying dynamics of offending behavior (Huprich et al, 2004).…”

“…The following case example illustrates how the R-PAS coding system was used in a criminal responsibility evaluation. A number of studies and a meta-analysis have demonstrated that R-PAS keeps the response process of the Rorschach task, as reflected in coded variables, similar to that found in the CS, while optimizing interpretability by controlling R (Hosseininasab et al, 2019; Pianowski et al, 2021).…”

Zulliger R-Optimized in the Evaluation of Depressive Characteristics

“…This application aims to reduce the variability in the number of responses between protocols, avoiding that they be too short or long and affect the stability of the indicators. The response quantity range considered appropriate in Rorschach Method varies between 18 and 27 responses (Meyer et al, 2017;Viglione et al, 2015) and several studies were conducted to verify the usefulness of this type of application in Rorschach, finding satisfactory results that justify its use (Graceffo, Mihura, & Meyer, 2014;Hosseininasab et al, 2019;Meyer et al, 2017Meyer et al, , 2020Shaffer, Erdberg, & Haroian, 2007;Viglione et al, 2015). Based on the findings on the R-optimized application in Rorschach and considering that the low number of responses in Zulliger may hinder the results derived from this instrument, we inferred that personality traits related to depression could stand out more by forcing a greater number of responses.…”