The Rorschach and the Body

Semer, Norma Lottenberg; Yázigi, Latife

doi:10.1027/1192-5604.30.1.3

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Six studies with a combined N of 386 examined the relation ship of the Anatomy and X-ray score to physical illness, includ ing illness in a close relative (Auker-Keller, 1998;Benony et al, 2002;Daley, 1992;Flahault & Sultan, 2010;Lottenberg Semer & Yazigi, 2009;Porcelli & Meyer, 2002). The combined validity coefficient for these studies was .22.…”

Section: Anatomy and X-raymentioning

confidence: 99%

A second look at the validity of widely used Rorschach indices: Comment on Mihura, Meyer, Dumitrascu, and Bombel (2013).

Wood¹,

Garb²,

Nezworski³

et al. 2015

Psychological Bulletin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We comment on the meta-analysis by Mihura, Meyer, Dumitrascu, and Bombel (2013), which examined the validity of scores in Exner's Comprehensive System (CS) for the Rorschach. First, we agree there is compelling evidence that 4 categories of cognitive scores-the "Rorschach cognitive quartet"-are related to cognitive ability/impairment and thought disorder. We now feel comfortable endorsing the use of these scores in some applied and research settings. Second, we conducted new meta-analyses (k = 44) for the 4 noncognitive Rorschach scores with highest validity in the Mihura et al. findings. Unlike Mihura et al., we included unpublished dissertations (although we did not attempt to exhaustively unearth all unpublished studies), calculated correlations instead of semipartial correlations, and used the Rorschach International Norms for a larger proportion of comparisons. Our validity estimates for the Suicide Constellation and Weighted Sum of Color were similar to or even higher than those of Mihura et al., although we concluded that support for the Suicide Constellation is limited and that Weighted Sum of Color probably does not measure its intended target. Our validity estimates for Sum Shading and the Anatomy and X-ray score were much lower than those of Mihura et al. We conclude that their meta-analysis accurately reflects the published literature, but their exclusion of unpublished studies led to substantial overestimates of validity for some and perhaps many Rorschach scores. Therefore, the evidence is presently insufficient to justify using the CS to measure noncognitive characteristics such as emotionality, negative affect, and bodily preoccupations.

show abstract

Section: Anatomy and X-raymentioning

confidence: 99%

A second look at the validity of widely used Rorschach indices: Comment on Mihura, Meyer, Dumitrascu, and Bombel (2013).

Wood¹,

Garb²,

Nezworski³

et al. 2015

Psychological Bulletin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Enuresis and Encopresis: The Elimination Disorders

Fischel

Wallis

2014

Handbook of Developmental Psychopathology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The validity of individual Rorschach variables: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of the comprehensive system.

Mihura¹,

Meyer²,

Dumitrascu³

et al. 2013

Psychological Bulletin

310

447

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We systematically evaluated the peer-reviewed Rorschach validity literature for the 65 main variables in the popular Comprehensive System (CS). Across 53 meta-analyses examining variables against externally assessed criteria (e.g., observer ratings, psychiatric diagnosis), the mean validity was r = .27 (k = 770) as compared to r = .08 (k = 386) across 42 meta-analyses examining variables against introspectively assessed criteria (e.g., self-report). Using Hemphill's (2003) data-driven guidelines for interpreting the magnitude of assessment effect sizes with only externally assessed criteria, we found 13 variables had excellent support (r ≥ .33, p < .001; [Symbol: see text] FSN > 50), 17 had good support (r ≥ .21, p < .05, FSN ≥ 10), 10 had modest support (p < .05 and either r ≥ .21, FSN < 10, or r = .15-.20, FSN ≥ 10), 13 had little (p < .05 and either r = < .15 or FSN < 10) or no support (p > .05), and 12 had no construct-relevant validity studies. The variables with the strongest support were largely those that assess cognitive and perceptual processes (e.g., Perceptual-Thinking Index, Synthesized Response); those with the least support tended to be very rare (e.g., Color Projection) or some of the more recently developed scales (e.g., Egocentricity Index, Isolation Index). Our findings are less positive, more nuanced, and more inclusive than those reported in the CS test manual. We discuss study limitations and the implications for research and clinical practice, including the importance of using different methods in order to improve our understanding of people.

show abstract

The Rorschach and the Body

Cited by 3 publications

References 18 publications

A second look at the validity of widely used Rorschach indices: Comment on Mihura, Meyer, Dumitrascu, and Bombel (2013).

A second look at the validity of widely used Rorschach indices: Comment on Mihura, Meyer, Dumitrascu, and Bombel (2013).

Enuresis and Encopresis: The Elimination Disorders

The validity of individual Rorschach variables: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of the comprehensive system.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About