The Rorschach test in clinical diagnosis: A critical review, with a backward look at Garfield (1947)

Wood, James M.; Lilienfeld, Scott O.; Garb, Howard N.; Nezworski, M. Teresa

doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-4679(200003)56:3<395::aid-jclp15>3.0.co;2-o

Cited by 101 publications

(88 citation statements)

References 170 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The authors of the present article and a colleague recently reviewed the research on the Rorschach and psychiatric diagnoses (Wood, Lilienfeld et al, 2000a, 2000b. We reached the following conclusions:…”

Section: Rorschach Validity: Relationships With Diagnoses and Self-rementioning

confidence: 52%

“…According to Exner (1991, p. 146), an elevated score on the DEPI "correlates very highly with a diagnosis that emphasizes serious affective problems." However, independent investigators have usually found that diagnoses of depression are not significantly related to scores on the original or revised version of the DEPI, either in adults or adolescents (for reviews, see Jorgensen, Anderson, & Dam, in press;Viglione, 1999;Wood, Lilienfeld, et al, 2000a).…”

Section: Rorschach Validity: Relationships With Diagnoses and Self-rementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Numerous articles concerning the scientific status of the Rorschach CS have appeared in recent years (e.g., Garb, 1999;Meyer, 1997), and in 1999 and 2000 three peer-reviewed journals (Psychological Assessment, Assessment, Journal of Clinical Psychology) devoted Special Sections to debates concerning the psychometric properties of the CS. The points in contention include such fundamental issues as accuracy and cultural generalizability of the CS norms, scoring reliability, validity, clinical utility, and accessibility of supporting research (Acklin, 1999;Archer, 1999;Garb, 1999; Garb, Wood, Nezworski, Grove, & Stejskal, in press; Hunsley & Bailey, 1999, in press;Stricker & Gold, 1999;Viglione, 1999;Weiner, 1996Weiner, , 1999Weiner, , 2000Wood & Lilienfeld, 1999;Wood, Lilienfeld, Garb, & Nezworski, 2000a, 2000b. The present discussion summarizes the central issues in the debate and reviews the most relevant publications on the topic.…”

mentioning

confidence: 96%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Scientific Status of Projective Techniques

Lilienfeld

Wood

Garb

2000

Psychol Sci Public Interest

Self Cite

603

391

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-AlthoughControversy has been no stranger to the field of personality assessment, and no issue in this field has been more controversial than the scientific status of projective techniques. Indeed, the novice reader attempting to make sense of the sprawling and bewilderingly complex literature on projective techniques is immediately confronted with a striking paradox. On the one hand, during the past four decades a litany of personality assessment researchers (e.g., Anastasi, 1982;Gittelman Klein, 1986;Dawes, 1994) have come forth to decry the reliability and validity of most projective techniques (see Lilienfeld, 1999). Jensen's (1965) famous quotation, although 35 years old, still captures the sentiments of many contemporary scientists toward the Rorschach Inkblot Test and numerous other projective techniques: ". . . the rate of scientific progress in clinical psychology might well be measured by the speed and thoroughness with which it gets over the Rorschach" (p. 238). On the other hand, clinicians in the United States and to a lesser extent those abroad continue to use projective techniques with great regularity, and many contend that these techniques are virtually indispensable to their daily practice (Watkins, Campbell, Neiberding, & Hallmark, 1995). The crux of this paradox was incisively summed up by Anastasi (1982), who observed that "Projective techniques present a curious discrepancy between research and practice. When evaluated as psychometric instruments, the large majority make a poor showing. Yet their popularity in clinical use continues unabated" (p. 564).Indeed, despite the sustained and often withering criticisms directed at projective techniques during the past several decades (Dawes, 1994;Lowenstein, 1987), numerous surveys demonstrate that such techniques continue to enjoy widespread popularity among clinicians. Durand, Blanchard, and Mindell (1988) reported that 49% of the directors of clinical psychology graduate programs and 65% of the directors of clinical psychology internships believed that formal training in projective techniques is important. Watkins et al. (1995) found that 5 projective techniques, including the Rorschach and Thematic Apperception Test (TAT), were among the 10 instruments most frequently used by clinical psychologists. For example, 82% of clinical psychologists reported that they administered the Rorschach at least "occasionally" in their test batteries and 43% reported that they "frequently" or "always" administered it. There is some indication, however, that the popularity of certain projective techniques may be waning. In a recent survey of practicing clinicians, Piotrowski, Belter, and Keller (1998) reported that several projective techniques, including the Rorschach and TAT, have been abandoned by a sizeable minority of users. Some authors (e.g., Piotrowski et al., 1998; Piotrowski & Belter, 1989) have attributed the recent decline in the popularity of projective techniques to the advent of managed care, although at least some of this decline may al...

show abstract

Section: Rorschach Validity: Relationships With Diagnoses and Self-rementioning

confidence: 52%

Section: Rorschach Validity: Relationships With Diagnoses and Self-rementioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 96%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Scientific Status of Projective Techniques

Lilienfeld

Wood

Garb

2000

Psychol Sci Public Interest

Self Cite

603

391

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Research indicates that the Rorschach can be helpful for detecting conditions characterized by thought disorder (e.g., schizophrenia; see Wood et al, 2000). It is also supported for evaluating dependent personality traits.…”

Section: Research On the Assessment Of Psychopathologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Effective use of projective techniques in clinical practice: Let the data help with selection and interpretation.

Garb¹,

Wood²,

Lilienfeld³

et al. 2002

Professional Psychology: Research and Practice

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

By learning about the validity of individual test scores, psychologists can avoid using scores that are invalid and making judgments that are potentially harmful to their clients. This is important not only for improving clinical and forensic practice but also for avoiding lawsuits. In this article, the effective use of projective techniques is described, with attention to the overperception of psychopathology, diagnosis and the description of symptoms, and the detection of child abuse. Guidelines are offered for using the Rorschach, Thematic Apperception Test, human figure drawings, and the Washington University Sentence Completion Test.

show abstract

“…A total score more than 198 on the Symptom Check List -90 was a negative predictor for outcome 34 .The Rorschach inkblot is used as a diagnostic tool for psychiatric diagnoses and for particular psychological symptoms 77 . Several Rorschach variables were associated with better outcome.…”

Section: Psychological Predictorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prognostic factors and underlying mechanisms in chronic low back pain

Hulst¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Rorschach test in clinical diagnosis: A critical review, with a backward look at Garfield (1947)

Cited by 101 publications

References 170 publications

The Scientific Status of Projective Techniques

The Scientific Status of Projective Techniques

Effective use of projective techniques in clinical practice: Let the data help with selection and interpretation.

Prognostic factors and underlying mechanisms in chronic low back pain

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About