The Rorschach and the TAT as Relational Instruments

Abstract

The paper presents a procedure for evaluating couples for clinical as well as for screening purposes such as assessing couples for therapy or for adoptive parenting. The procedure combines individual evaluation (a clinical interview, two subtests of the WAIS-R, the Rorschach, and TAT), with couple evaluation (Consensus Rorschach and Consensus TAT). The author describes her method for administering and scoring the Consensus Rorschach and of administering and analyzing the Consensus TAT as follows: Having completed an individual Rorschach and TAT, in the couple stage the partners discuss each card and try to reach agreements on one or more responses, and to create together stories about several TAT cards. The examiner tape-records the process, and notes patterns of interaction, such as who presses for agreements; who dominates the decisions; are they flexible or rigid and defensive; do they negotiate with a sense of respect for self and other or do they fight about autonomy, control, or power. Each Rorschach response is scored according to the Exner system, and a structural summary for the couple’s record is constructed. Then each response gets an Interaction score developed by the author (see Table 2 ). (Readers are referred to other publications by the author, describing this procedure and several relational styles of couples. See references.) This method offers a representation of the couple dynamics and makes possible an appraisal of the process as well as the final product of the couple’s interaction. While in the individual tests each spouse creates for the examiner his unique interpretation of reality, in the relational part we watch the couple’s effort to integrate each spouse’s individual “script” – i.e., his/her interpretation of reality and of the relationship – and to create a “couple script.” Spouses often experience surprise and even dismay at the dissimilarity of their perception, while others feel intrigued and excited at the opportunity of seeing things in a different, new way. In some cases relief or joy is experienced at seeing things the same way. A number of vignettes illustrate how the unique style of the couple emerges in their test interaction, revealing their positive resources as well as their problematic areas. An extended case is presented, of a couple in the stage of courtship, hesitating on the verge of getting married. Each spouse’s background material and test material are presented and analyzed (see Tables 3 and 4 ), and some hypotheses are made as to their inner needs from a partner and their inhibitions about commitment to an intimate relationship. The interaction reveals their struggle in the first stages of creating a “couple script,” as each of them presents his personae, but also reveals his hidden needs and fears, and his projected image of the other. Focusing on issues of dependence and of aggression, the reader can see what these two young people need from each other. The man, Ami, impresses and attracts the woman, Irit, with his strong, coping, and ambitious personae. But he needs her to contain his insecurity and dependency needs, as well as to support his needs to develop and become what he strives for. Irit needs Ami to accept and even admire her hidden fiery, imaginative qualities, but also to respect her individuality and not try to dominate her. She also unconsciously yearns for his help in restoring parts of her repressed, lost self. On the basis of this material the author suggests ways of using the feedback session and the written report for counseling and for planning psychotherapy.

The Processometric Consensus Rorschach Test (pCRT-II) – An Improved Evaluation System

“…Nevertheless, researchers have developed a series of similar evaluation categories, which can be grouped as follows. The first one is dominance (Bauman & Roman, 1966; Noy-Sharav, 2005), which examines the power structure (supremacy and subordination) within a relationship. The second category examines communication and its success from different perspectives: namely, combination (Bauman & Roman, 1966; Noy-Sharav, 2005), productive and unproductive interactions (Handler, 1997), and different forms of agreement such as former agreement, creation, pseudo-agreement , and no agreement (Noy-Sharav, 2005).…”

“…The first one is dominance (Bauman & Roman, 1966; Noy-Sharav, 2005), which examines the power structure (supremacy and subordination) within a relationship. The second category examines communication and its success from different perspectives: namely, combination (Bauman & Roman, 1966; Noy-Sharav, 2005), productive and unproductive interactions (Handler, 1997), and different forms of agreement such as former agreement, creation, pseudo-agreement , and no agreement (Noy-Sharav, 2005). Using the standard variables of the individual Rorschach Comprehensive System (CS; Exner, 2003), the couple’s communication can also be examined through the R variable (Aschieri, 2013) as well as cognitive mediation and ideation (X–%, WDA%, Sum6%, WSum6%; Aschieri, 2013).…”

“…Blanchard (1959) was the first to suggest that Rorschach cards could be used to understand and track the functioning of interpersonal relationships. Since then, under various names (Conjoint [Aschieri, 2013]; Consensus [Hodgson et al, 2003]; Couple [Lewis et al, 1976]; Family Rorschach [Loveland et al, 1963] test), its use has spread in practice, with several versions being used to (a) compare the individual and couple versions of Rorschach (Bauman & Roman, 1966;Handler, 1997;Krauser, 1964;Noy-Sharav, 2005;Roisko et al, 2011;Willi, 1969Willi, , 1973; (b) plan a therapeutic process (Klopfer, 1984); (c) raise awareness of relational dynamics (Nakamura & Nakamura, 1987); (d) provide feedback on the therapeutic process (Sendin & Garcia Alba, 1994); and (e) create a therapeutic intervention for the couple (Provenzi et al, 2017) and the group (Aschieri & Vetere, 2020).…”