Pruojective teust

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

ve paradox".[1] Projective tests have their ori ins in psychoanalytic psycholo y, !hich ar ues that humans have conscious and unconscious attitudes and motivations that are "eyond or hidden from conscious a!areness. #he terms "o"jective test" and "projective test" have recently come under criticism in the Journal of Personality Assessment. #he more descriptive "ratin scale or self$report measures" and "free response measures" are su respectively.
4 See also 5 Refere nces 6 Footno tes
[%]

ested, rather than the terms "o"jective tests" and "projective tests,"

[edit]Theory #he eneral theoretical position "ehind projective tests is that !henever a specific &uestion is asked, the response !ill "e consciously$formulated and socially determined. #hese responses do not reflect the respondent's unconscious or implicit attitudes or motivations. #he respondent's deep$seated motivations may not "e consciously reco ni(ed "y the respondent or the respondent may not "e a"le to ver"ally express them in the form demanded "y the &uestioner. )dvocates of projective tests stress that the am"i uity of the stimuli presented !ithin the tests allo! su"jects to express thou hts that ori inate on a deeper level than tapped "y explicit &uestions. Projective tests lost some of their popularity durin the 1*+,s and 1**,s in part "ecause of the overall loss of popularity of the psychoanalytic method and theories. -espite this, they are still used &uite fre&uently. [edit]Common

variants

[edit]Rorschach Main article: Rorschach inkblot test #he "est kno!n and most fre&uently used projective test is the .orschach ink"lot test, in !hich a su"ject is sho!n a series of ten irre ular "ut symmetrical ink"lots, and asked to explain !hat they see.[1] #he su"ject's responses are then analy(ed in various !ays, notin not only !hat !as said,

"ut the time taken to respond, !hich aspect of the dra!in !as focused on, and ho! sin le responses compared to other responses for the same dra!in . For example, if someone consistently sees the ima es as threatenin and fri htenin , the tester mi ht infer that the su"ject may suffer from paranoia.

.orschach test
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
/.edirected from .orschach ink"lot test0

"Rorschach Test" redirects here. For the band, see Rorschach Test (band .

The first of the ten cards in the Rorschach test, with the occurrence of the most statistically frequent details indicated.[1][ ] The ima!es themsel"es are only one com#onent of the test, whose focus is the analysis of the #erce#tion of the ima!es.

$%

1&%

6%

#he Rorschach test /1erman pronunciation2 [oa']3 also kno!n as the Rorschach inkblot test or simply the Inkblot test0 is a psycholo ical test in !hich su"jects' perceptions of ink"lots are recorded and then analy(ed usin psycholo ical interpretation, complex scientifically derived al orithms, or "oth. 4ome psycholo ists use this test to examine a person's personality characteristics and emotional functionin . 5t has "een employed to detect an underlyin thou ht disorder, especially in cases !here patients are reluctant to descri"e their thinkin processes openly.[6] #he test takes its name from that of its creator, 4!iss psycholo ist 7ermann .orschach. 5n a national survey in the 8.4., the .orschach !as ranked ei hth amon psycholo ical tests used in outpatient mental health facilities.[9] 5t is the second most !idely used test "y mem"ers of the 4ociety for Personality )ssessment, and it is re&uested "y psychiatrists in %:; of forensic assessmentcases,[9] usually in a "attery of tests that often include the <<P5$% and the <=<5$555.
[:]

5n surveys, the use of .orschach ran es from a lo! of %,

Contents
[hide]

1 (istory )ethod

o o o o

.1 Features or cate!ories .1.1 *ontent .1. +ocation .1., -eterminants . .'ner scorin! system ., *ultural differences .4 /eurolo!y , The ten in01lots 4 2re"alence

o o o o o o o o

4.1 3nited States 5 *ontro"ersy 5.1 Test materials 5. Tester #ro4ection 5., 5alidity 5.4 Relia1ility 5.5 2o#ulation norms 5.6 6##lications 5.7 2rotection of test items and ethics 6 See also 7 /otes & References $ .'ternal lin0s

History

7ermann .orschach created the .orschach ink"lot test in 1*%1.

8sin interpretation of "am"i uous desi ns" to assess an individual's personality is an idea that oes "ack to >eonardo da ?inci and @otticelli. 5nterpretation of ink"lots !as central to a ame from the late 1*th century. .orschach's, ho!ever, !as the first systematic approach of this kind.
[1,]

5t has "een su

ested that .orschach's use of ink"lots may have "een inspired "y 1erman

doctorAustinus Berner !ho, in 1+:C, had pu"lished a popular "ook of poems, each of !hich !as inspired "y an accidental ink"lot.[11] French psycholo ist )lfred @inet had also experimented !ith ink"lots as a creativity test,[1%] and, after the turn of the century, psycholo ical experiments !here ink"lots !ere utili(ed multiplied, !ith aims such as studyin ima ination and consciousness. [16] )fter studyin 6,, mental patients and 1,, control su"jects, in 1*%1 .orschach !rote his "ookPsychodia!nostik, !hich !as to form the "asis of the ink"lot test /after experimentin !ith several hundred ink"lots, he selected a set of ten for their dia nostic value0, [19] "ut he died the follo!in year. )lthou h he had served as ?ice President of the 4!iss Psychoanalytic 4ociety, .orschach had difficulty in pu"lishin the "ook and it attracted little attention !hen it first appeared.[1:] 5n 1*%C, the ne!ly$founded 7ans 7u"er pu"lishin house purchased .orschach's "ook Psychodia!nostikfrom the inventory of Drnst @ircher.[1E] 7u"er has remained the pu"lisher of the test and related "ook, !ith .orschach a re istered trademark of 4!iss pu"lisher ?erla 7ans 7u"er, 7o refe )1.[1C] #he !ork has "een descri"ed as "a densely !ritten piece couched in dry, scientific terminolo y".[1+] )fter .orschach's death, the ori inal test scorin system !as improved "y 4amuel @eck, @runo Blopfer and others.[1*] Aohn D. Dxnersummari(ed some of these later developments in the com"rehensi#e system, at the same time tryin to make the scorin more statistically ri orous. 4ome systems are "ased on the psychoanalytic concept of o"ject relations. #he Dxner system remains very popular in the 8nited 4tates, !hile in Durope other methods sometimes dominate,[%,][%1] such as that descri"ed in the text"ook "y Dvald @ohm, !hich is closer to the ori inal .orschach system and rooted more deeply in the ori inal psychoanalysis principles.[citation
needed]

Method
#he tester and su"ject typically sit next to each other at a ta"le, !ith the tester sli htly "ehind the su"ject.[%%] #his is to facilitate a "relaxed "ut controlled atmosphere". #here are ten official ink"lots, each printed on a separate !hite card, approximately 1+x%9 cm in si(e. [%6] Dach of the "lots has

near perfect "ilateral symmetry. Five ink"lots are of "lack ink, t!o are of "lack and red ink and three are multicolored, on a !hite "ack round.[%9][%:][%E] )fter the test su"ject has seen and responded to all of the ink"lots /free association phase0, the tester then presents them a ain one at a time in a set se&uence for the su"ject to study2 the su"ject is asked to note !here he sees !hat he ori inally sa! and !hat makes it look like that /in$uiry phase0. #he su"ject is usually asked to hold the cards and may rotate them. Whether the cards are rotated, and other related factors such as !hether permission to rotate them is asked, may expose personality traits and normally contri"utes to the assessment.[%C] )s the su"ject is examinin the ink"lots, the psycholo ist !rites do!n everythin the su"ject says or does, no matter ho! trivial. )nalysis of responses is recorded "y the test administrator usin a ta"ulation and scorin sheet and, if re&uired, a separate location chart.[%%] #he eneral oal of the test is to provide data a"out co nition and personality varia"les such as motivations, response tendencies, co nitive operations, affectivity, and personalFinterpersonal perceptions. #he underlyin assumption is that an individual !ill class external stimuli "ased on person$specific perceptual sets, and includin needs, "ase motives, conflicts, and that this clusterin process is representative of the process used in real$life situations.[%+] <ethods of interpretation differ. .orschach scorin systems have "een descri"ed as a system of pe s on !hich to han one's kno!led e of personality. [%*] #he most !idely used method in the 8nited 4tates is "ased on the !ork of Dxner. )dministration of the test to a roup of su"jects, "y means of projected ima es, has also occasionally "een performed, "ut mainly for research rather than dia nostic purposes. [%%] #est administration is not to "e confused !ith test interpretation2
"#he interpretation of a .orschach record is a complex process. 5t re&uires a !ealth of kno!led e concernin personality dynamics enerally as !ell as considera"le experience !ith the .orschach method specifically. Proficiency as a .orschach administrator can "e ained !ithin a fe! months. 7o!ever, even those !ho are a"le and &ualified to "ecome .orschach inter"reters usually remain in a "learnin sta e" for a num"er of years."[%%]

Features or categories
#he interpretation of the .orschach test is not "ased primarily on the contents of the response, i.e., %hat the individual sees in the ink"lot /the content0. 5n fact, the contents of the response are only a comparatively small portion of a "roader cluster of varia"les that are used to interpret the .orschach data2 for instance, information is provided "y the time taken "efore providin a response for a card can "e si nificant /takin a lon time can indicate "shock" on the card0. [6,] as !ell as "y any comments the su"ject may make in addition to providin a direct response. [61]

5n particular, information a"out determinants /the aspects of the ink"lots that tri response, such as form and color0 and location/!hich details of the ink"lots tri evidence.[6%][66] "Popularity" and "ori inality" of responses dimensions in the analysis.[6:]
[69]

ered the ered the

response0 is often considered more important than content, althou h there is contrastin can also "e considered as "asic

Content
This section requires e'#ansion.

=ontent is classified in terms of "human", "nature", "animal", "a"stract", etc., as !ell as for statistical popularity /or, conversely, ori inality0. [6E] <ore than any other feature in the test, content response can "e controlled consciously "y the su"ject, and may "e elicited "y very disparate factors, !hich makes it difficult to use content alone to dra! any conclusions a"out the su"ject's personality3 !ith certain individuals, content responses may potentially "e interpreted directly, and some information can at times "e o"tained "y analy(in thematic trends in the !hole set of content responses /!hich is only feasi"le !hen several responses are availa"le0, "ut in eneral content cannot "e analy(ed outside of the context of the entire test record.[6C]

Location
This section requires e'#ansion.

#he "asis for the response is usually the !hole ink"lot, a detail /either a commonly or an uncommonly selected one0, or the ne ative spacearound or !ithin the ink"lot.[%6]

Determinants
4ystems for .orschach scorin enerally include a concept of "determinants"2 these are the

factors that contri"ute to esta"lish the similarity "et!een the ink"lot and the su"ject's content response a"out it, and they can represent certain "asic experiential$perceptual attitudes, sho!in aspects of the !ay a su"ject perceives the !orld. .orschach's ori inal !ork used only form, color and mo#ement3 currently, another major determinant considered is shadin!,
[6+]

!hich !as inadvertently introduced "y poor printin of the ink"lots /!hich ori inally featured

uniform saturation0, and su"se&uently reco ni(ed as si nificant "y .orschach himself. [6*][9,][91] Form is the most common determinant, and is related to intellectual processes3 color responses often provide direct insi ht into emotional life. 4hadin and movement have "een considered more am"i uously, "oth in definition and interpretation2 .orschach ori inally disre arded shadin /!hich !as ori inally not even present on the cards, "ein a result of the print process0, [9%] and he

considered movement as only actual experiencin of motion, !hile others have !idened the scope of this determinant, takin it to mean that the su"ject sees somethin " oin on". [96] <ore than one determinant can contri"ute to the formation of the su"ject's percept, and fusion of t!o determinants is taken into account, !hile also assessin !hich of the t!o constituted the primary contri"utor /e. . "form$color" implies a more refined control of impulse than "color$form"0. 5t is, indeed, from the relation and "alance amon determinants that personality can "e most readily inferred.[96]

!ner scoring system

#he &'ner scorin! system, also kno!n as the Rorschach (om"rehensi#e )ystem /.=40,[99] is the standard method for interpretin the .orschach test. 5t !as developed in the 1*E,s "y -r. Aohn D. Dxner, as a more ri orous system of analysis. 5t has "een extensively validated and sho!s hi h inter$rater relia"ility.[+][9:] 5n 1*E*, Dxner pu"lished The Rorschach )ystems, a concise description of !hat !ould "e later called "the Dxner system". 7e later pu"lished a study in multiple volumes called The Rorschach: A (om"rehensi#e system, the most accepted full description of his system. =reation of the ne! system !as prompted "y the reali(ation that at least five related, "ut ultimately different methods !ere in common use at the time, !ith a si(ea"le minority of examiners not employin any reco ni(ed method at all, "asin instead their jud ment on su"jective assessment, or ar"itrarily mixin characteristics of the various standardi(ed systems. [9E] #he key components of the Dxner system are the clusteri(ation of .orschach varia"les and a se&uential search strate y to determine the order in !hich to analy(e them, [9C] framed in the context of standardi(ed administration, o"jective, relia"le codin and a representative normative data"ase.[9+] #he system places a lot of emphasis on a co nitive triad of information "rocessin!, related to ho! the su"ject processes input data, co!niti#e mediation, referrin to the !ay information is transformed and identified, and ideation.[9*] 5n the system, responses are scored !ith reference to their level of va ueness or synthesis of multiple ima es in the "lot, the location of the response, !hich of a variety of determinants is used to produce the response /i.e., !hat makes the ink"lot look like !hat it is said to resem"le0, the form &uality of the response /to !hat extent a response is faithful to ho! the actual ink"lot looks0, the contents of the response /!hat the respondent actually sees in the "lot0, the de ree of mental or ani(in activity that is involved in producin the response, and any illo ical, incon ruous, or incoherent aspects of responses. 5t has "een reported that popular responses on the first card include "at, "ad e and coat of arms. [%*]

8sin the scores for these cate ories, the examiner then performs a series of calculations producin a structural summary of the test data. #he results of the structural summary are interpreted usin existin research data on personality characteristics that have "een demonstrated to "e associated !ith different kinds of responses. With the .orschach plates /the ten ink"lots0, the area of each "lot !hich is distin uished "y the client is noted and coded G typically as "commonly selected" or "uncommonly selected". #here !ere many different methods for codin the areas of the "lots. Dxner settled upon the area codin system promoted "y 4. A. @eck /1*99 and 1*E10. #his system !as in turn "ased upon Blopfer's /1*9%0 !ork. )s pertains to response form, a concept of "form &uality" !as present from the earliest of .orschach's !orks, as a su"jective jud ment of ho! !ell the form of the su"ject's response matched the ink"lots /.orschach !ould ive a hi her form score to more "ori inal" yet ood form responses0, and this concept !as follo!ed "y other methods, especially in Durope3 in contrast, the Dxner system solely defines " ood form" as a matter of !ord occurrence fre&uency, reducin it to a measure of the su"ject's distance to the population avera e. [:,]

Cultural di""erences
=omparin Horth )merican Dxner normative data !ith data from Duropean and 4outh )merican su"jects sho!ed marked differences in some features, some of !hich impact important varia"les, !hile others /such as the avera e num"er of responses0 coincide. [:1] For instance, texture response is typically (ero in Duropean su"jects /if interpreted as a need for closeness, in accordance !ith the system, Duropean !ould seem to express it only !hen it reaches the level of a cra#in! for closeness0,[:%] and there are fe!er " ood form" responses, to the point !here schi(ophrenia may "e suspected if data !ere correlated to the Horth )merican norms. [:6] Form is also often the only determinant expressed "y Duropean su"jects3 [:9] !hile color is less fre&uent than in )merican su"jects, color$form responses are comparatively fre&uent in opposition to form$ color responses3 since the latter tend to "e interpreted as indicators of a defensive attitude in processin affect, this difference could stem from a hi her value attri"uted to spontaneous expression of emotions.[:%] #he differences in form &uality are attri"uta"le to purely cultural aspects2 different cultures !ill exhi"it different "common" o"jects /French su"jects often identify a chameleon in card ?555, !hich is normally classed as an "unusual" response, as opposed to other animals like cats and do s3 in 4candinavia, "=hristmas elves" (nisser is a popular response for card 55, and "musical instrument" on card ?5 is popular for Aapanese people0, [::] and different lan ua es !ill exhi"it semantic differences in namin the same o"ject /the fi ure of card 5? is often called a troll "y

4candinavians and an o!re "y French people0.[:E] <any of Dxner's "popular" responses /those iven "y at least one third of the Horth )merican sample used0 seem to "e universally popular, as sho!n "y samples in Durope, Aapan and 4outh )merica, !hile specifically card 5I's "human" response, the cra" or spider in card I and one of either the "utterfly or the "at in card 5 appear to "e characteristic of Horth )merica.[:E][:C] Form &uality, popular content responses and locations are the only coded varia"les in the Dxner systems that are "ased on fre&uency of occurrence, and thus immediately su"ject to cultural influences3 therefore, cultural$dependent interpretation of test data may not necessarily need to extend "eyond these components.[:+] #he cited lan ua e differences mean that it's imperative for the test to "e administered in the su"ject's native lan ua e or a very !ell mastered second lan ua e, and, conversely, the examiner should master the lan ua e used in the test. #est responses should also not "e translated into another lan ua e prior to analysis except possi"ly "y a clinician masterin "oth lan ua es. For example, a "o! tie is a fre&uent response for the center detail of card 555, "ut since the e&uivalent term in French translates to ""utterfly tie", an examiner not appreciatin this lan ua e nuance may code the response differently from !hat is expected. [:*]

#eurology
.esearch usin fi ure ,6 have found that JJuni&ue responsesKK are produced in people !ith lar er amy dalas. #he researchers note, "4ince previous reports have indicated that uni&ue responses !ere o"served at hi her fre&uency in the artistic population than in the nonartistic normal population, this positive correlation su ests that amy dalar enlar ement in the normal population mi ht "e related to creative mental activity." [E,]

The ten inkblots

@elo! are the ten ink"lots of the .orschach test printed in .orschach's Rorschach Test * Psychodia!nostic Plates,[E1] to ether !ith the most fre&uent responses for either the !hole ima e or the most prominent details accordin to various authors. #hey have "een in the pu"lic domain in 7ermann .orschach's native 4!it(erland since at least 1**% /C, years after the author's death, or :, years after the cut$off date of 1*9%0, accordin to 4!iss copyri ht la!.[E%]
[E6]

#hey are also in the pu"lic domain under 8nited 4tates copyri ht la!2 [E9][E:] all !orks pu"lished

"efore 1*%6 are considered to "e in the pu"lic domain. [EE] Card Popular responses[67][6&][6$] Comments[78][71]

Beck: 1at, 1utterfly, moth Piotrowski: 1at 95,%:, 1utterfly9 $%: Dana (France): 1utterfly 9,$%:

Beck: two humans Piotrowski: four>le!!ed animal9,4%, !ray #arts: Dana (France): animal? do!, ele#hant, 1ear 958%, !ray:

Beck: two humans 9!ray: Piotrowski: human fi!ures 97 %, !ray: Dana (France): human 976%, !ray:

;hen seein! card I, su14ects often inquire on how they should #roceed, and questions on what they are allowed to do with the card 9e.!. turnin! it: are not "ery si!nificant. <ein! the first card, it can #ro"ide clues a1out how su14ects tac0le a new and stressful tas0. =t is not, howe"er, a card that is usually difficult for the su14ect to handle, ha"in! readily a"aila1le #o#ular res#onses. The red details of card II are often seen as 1lood, and are the most distincti"e features. Res#onses to them can #ro"ide indications a1out how a su14ect is li0ely to mana!e feelin!s of an!er or #hysical harm. This card can induce a "ariety of se'ual res#onses. Card III is ty#ically #ercei"ed to contain two humans in"ol"ed in some interaction, and may #ro"ide information

Beck: animal hide, s0in, ru! Piotrowski: animal s0in, s0in ru!941%: Dana (France): animal s0in 946%:

Beck: 1at, 1utterfly, moth Piotrowski: 1utterfly 94&%:, 1at948%: Dana (France): 1utterfly 94&%:, 1at946%:

a1out how the su14ect relates with other #eo#le 9s#ecifically, res#onse latency may re"eal stru!!lin! social interactions:. Card IV is nota1le for its dar0 color and its shadin! 9#osin! difficulties for de#ressed su14ects:, and is !enerally #ercei"ed as a 1i! and sometimes threatenin! fi!ure@ com#ounded with the common im#ression of the su14ect 1ein! in an inferior #osition 9Aloo0in! u#A: to it, this ser"es to elicit a sense of authority. The human or animal content seen in the card is almost in"aria1ly classified as male rather than female, and the qualities e'#ressed 1y the su14ect may indicate attitudes toward men and authority. Card V is an easily ela1orated card that is not usually #ercei"ed as threatenin!, and ty#ically insti!ates a Achan!e of #aceA in the test, after the #re"ious

Beck: animal hide, s0in, ru! Piotrowski: animal s0in, s0in ru!941%: Dana (France): animal s0in 946%:

Beck: human heads or faces9to#: Piotrowski: heads of women or children 9 Dana (France): human head 946%, to#:

7%, to#:

more challen!in! cards. *ontainin! few features that !enerate concerns or com#licate the ela1oration, it is the easiest 1lot to !enerate a !ood quality res#onse a1out. Te'ture is the dominant characteristic of card VI, which often elicits association related to inter#ersonal closeness@ it is s#ecifically a Ase' cardA, its li0ely se'ual #erce#ts 1ein! re#orted more frequently than in any other card, e"en thou!h other cards ha"e a !reater "ariety of commonly seen se'ual contents. Card VII can 1e associated with femininity 9the human fi!ures commonly seein! in it 1ein! descri1ed as women or children:, and function as a Amother cardA, where difficulties in res#ondin! may 1e related to concerns with the female fi!ures in the su14ectBs life. The center detail

Beck: animal? not cat or do!9#in0: Piotrowski: four>le!!ed animal9$4%, #in0: Dana (France): four>le!!ed animal9$,%, #in0:

Beck: human 9oran!e: Piotrowski: none Dana (France): none

is relati"ely often 9thou!h not #o#ularly: identified as a "a!ina, which ma0e this card also relate to feminine se'uality in #articular. 2eo#le often e'#ress relief a1out card VIII, which lets them rela' and res#ond effecti"ely. Similar to card 5, it re#resents a Achan!e of #aceA@ howe"er, the card introduces new ela1oration difficulties, 1ein! com#le' and the first multi>colored card in the set. Therefore, #eo#le who find #rocessin! com#le' situations or emotional stimuli distressin! or difficult may 1e uncomforta1le with this card. *haracteristic of card IX is indistinct form and diffuse, muted chromatic features, creatin! a !eneral "a!ueness. There is only one #o#ular res#onse, and it is the least frequent of all cards. (a"in! difficulty with

Beck: cra1, lo1ster, s#ider91lue: cra1, s#ider 9,7%, 1lue:, Piotrowski: ra11it head 9,1%, li!ht !reen:, cater#illars, worms, sna0es 9 Dana (France): none

&%, dee# !reen:

#rocessin! this card may indicate trou1le dealin! with unstructured data, 1ut aside from this there are few #articular A#ullsA ty#ical of this card. Card X is structurally similar to card 5===, 1ut its uncertainty and com#le'ity are reminiscent of card =C? #eo#le who find it difficult to deal with many concurrent stimuli may not #articularly li0e this otherwise #leasant card. <ein! the last card, it may #ro"ide an o##ortunity for the su14ect to Asi!n outA 1y indicatin! what they feel their situation is li0e, or what they desire to 0now.

$revalence
The e'am#les and #ers#ecti"e in this article may not represent a worldwide view of t e su!"ect. 2lease im#ro"e this article and discuss the issue on the tal0 #a!e.

%nited &tates
#he .orschach test is used almost exclusively "y psycholo ists. 5n a survey done in the year %,,,, %,; of correctional psycholo ists used the .orschach !hile +,; used the <<P5.
[E]

Forensic psycholo ists use the .orschach 6E; of the time. [C%] 5n custody cases, %6; of

psycholo ists use the .orschach to examine a child.[C6] )nother survey found that 1%9 out of 1E1 /CC;0 of clinical psycholo ists en a in in assessment services utili(e the .orschach, [C9] and +,; of psycholo y raduate pro rams teach its use.[C] )nother study found that its use "y clinical

psycholo ists !as only 96;, !hile it !as used less than %9; of the time "y school psycholo ists.
[C%]

Controversy
4ome skeptics consider the .orschach ink"lot test pseudoscience,[*][C:] as several studies su ested that conclusions reached "y test administrators since the 1*:,s !ere akin to cold readin .[CE] 5n the 1*:* edition of Mental Measurement +earbook, >ee =ron"ach /former President of the Psychometric 4ociety and )merican Psycholo ical )ssociation0 [CC] is &uoted in a revie!2 "#he test has repeatedly failed as a prediction of practical criteria. #here is nothin in the literature to encoura e reliance on .orschach interpretations." 5n addition, major revie!er .aymond A. <c=all !rites /p. 1:902 "#hou h tens of thousands of .orschach tests have "een administered "y hundreds of trained professionals since that time /of a previous revie!0, and !hile many relationships to personality dynamics and "ehavior have "een hypothesi(ed, the vast majority of these relationships ha#e ne#er been #alidated em"irically [sic], despite the appearance of more than %,,,, pu"lications a"out the test." [C+] ) moratorium on its use !as called for in 1***.[C*] ) %,,6 report "y Wood and collea ues had more mixed vie!s2 "<ore than :, years of research have confirmed >ee A. =ron"achKs /1*C,0 final verdict2 that some .orschach scores, thou h fallin !oefully short of the claims made "y proponents, nevertheless possess Lvalidity reater than chanceM /p. E6E0. [...] "5ts value as a measure of thou ht disorder in schi(ophrenia research is !ell accepted. 5t is also used re ularly in research on dependency, and, less often, in studies on hostility and anxiety. Furthermore, su"stantial evidence justifies the use of the .orschach as a clinical measure of intelli ence and thou ht disorder." [+,]

Test materials
#he "asic premise of the test is that o"jective meanin can "e extracted from responses to "lots of ink !hich are supposedly meanin less. 4upporters of the .orschach ink"lot test "elieve that the su"ject's response to an am"i uous and meanin less stimulus can provide insi ht into their thou ht processes, "ut it is not clear ho% this occurs. )lso, recent research sho!s that the "lots are not entirely meanin less, and that a patient typically responds to meanin ful as !ell as am"i uous aspects of the "lots.[+] .e"er /1*+:0 descri"es the "lots as merely ".. the vehicle for the interaction .." "et!een client and therapist, concludin 2 ".. the usefulness of the .orschach !ill depend upon the sensitivity, empathy and insi htfulness of the tester totally independently of the .orschach itself. )n intense dialo ue a"out the !allpaper or the ru !ould do as !ell provided that "oth parties "elieve."[+1]

Tester 'ro(ection
4ome critics ar ue that the testin psycholo ist must also project onto the patterns. ) possi"le example sometimes attri"uted to the psycholo ist's su"jective jud ement is that responses are coded /amon many other thin s0, for "Form Nuality"2 in essence, !hether the su"ject's response fits !ith ho! the "lot actually looks. 4uperficially this mi ht "e considered a su"jective jud ment, dependin on ho! the examiner has internali(ed the cate ories involved. @ut !ith the Dxner system of scorin , much of the su"jectivity is eliminated or reduced "y use of fre&uency ta"les that indicate ho! often a particular response is iven "y the population in eneral. [+] )nother example is that the response ""ra" !as considered a "sex" response "y male psycholo ists, "ut a "clothin " response "y females.[+%] 5n Dxner's system, ho!ever, such a response is al!ays coded as "clothin " unless there is a clear sexual reference in the response. [+] #hird parties could "e used to avoid this pro"lem, "ut the .orschach's inter$rater relia"ility has "een &uestioned. #hat is, in some studies the scores o"tained "y t!o independent scorers do not match !ith reat consistency.[+6] #his conclusion !as challen ed in studies usin lar e samples reported in %,,%.[+9]

)alidity
When interpreted as a projective test, results are thus poorly verifia"le. #he Dxner system of scorin /also kno!n as the "=omprehensive 4ystem"0 is meant to address this, and has all "ut displaced many earlier /and less consistent0 scorin systems. 5t makes heavy use of !hat factor /shadin , color, outline, etc.0 of the ink"lot leads to each of the tested person's comments. -isa reements a"out test validity remain2 !hile the Dxner proposed a ri orous scorin system, latitude remained in the actual interpretation, and the clinician's !rite$up of the test record is still partly su"jective.[+:] .e"er /1*+:0 comments ".. there is essentially no evidence !hatsoever that the test has even a shred of validity." [+1] Hevertheless, there is su"stantial research indicatin the utility of the measure for a fe! scores. 4everal scores correlate !ell !ith eneralintelli ence. 5nterestin ly, one such scale is ., the total num"er of responses3 this reveals the &uestiona"le side$effect that more intelli ent people tend to "e elevated on many patholo y scales, since many scales do not correct for hi h .2 if a su"ject ives t!ice as many responses overall, it is more likely that some of these !ill seem "patholo ical". )lso correlated !ith intelli ence are the scales for Or ani(ational )ctivity, =omplexity, Form Nuality, and 7uman Fi ure responses. [+E] #he same source reports that validity has also "een sho!n for detectin such conditions as schi(ophrenia and other psychotic disorders3 thou ht disorders3 and personality disorders /includin "orderline personality disorder0. #here is some evidence that the -eviant ?er"ali(ations scale relates to "ipolar disorder. #he

authors conclude that "Other!ise, the =omprehensive 4ystem doesn't appear to "ear a consistent relationship to psycholo ical disorders or symptoms, personality characteristics, potential for violence, or such health pro"lems as cancer". [+C] /=ancer is mentioned "ecause a small minority of .orschach enthusiasts have claimed the test can predict cancer.0 [++]

Reliability
5t is also thou ht that the test's relia"ility can depend su"stantially on details of the testin procedure, such as !here the tester and su"ject are seated, any introductory !ords, ver"al and nonver"al responses to su"jects' &uestions or comments, and ho! responses are recorded. Dxner has pu"lished detailed instructions, "ut Wood et al. [+%] cites many court cases !here these had not "een follo!ed. 4imilarly, the procedures for codin responses are fairly !ell specified "ut extremely time$consumin to inexperienced examiners, !ho may cut corners as a result. 84 =ourts have challen ed .orschach as !ell. Jones # A"fel /1**C0 stated /&uotin from Attorney,s Te'tbook of Medicine0 that .orschash "results do not meet the re&uirements of standardi(ation, relia"ility, or validity of clinical dia nostic tests, and interpretation thus is often controversial".[+*] 5n )tate e' rel -.-. /1***0 !here under cross examination -r. @o acki stated under oath "many psycholo ists do not "elieve much in the validity or effectiveness of the .orschach test"[*,] and .) # /attle /%,,10 ruled that the .orschash "does not have an o"jective scorin system." [*1]

$o'ulation norms
)nother area of controversy are the test's statistical norms. Dxner's system !as thou ht to possess normative scores for various populations. @ut, "e innin in the mid$1**,s others "e an to try to replicate or update these norms and failed. 5n particular, discrepancies seemed to focus on indices measurin narcissism, disordered thinkin , and discomfort in close relationships.
[*%]

>illenfeld and collea ues, !ho are critical of the .orschach, have stated that this proves that est that hi h rates of patholo y detected "y the .orshach accurately reflect

the .orschach tends to "overpatholo ise normals".[*%] )lthou h .orschach proponents, such as 7i""ard,[*6] su increasin psychopatholo y in society, the .orschach also identifies half of all test$takers as possessin "distorted thinkin ",[*9] a false positive rate unexplained "y current research. #he accusation of "over$patholo isin " has also "een considered "y <eyer et al. /%,,C0. #hey presented an international colla"orative study of 9C,9 .orschach protocols, o"tained in %1 different samples, across 1C different countries, !ith only % ; sho!in si nificant elevations on the index of perceptual and thinkin disorder, 1% ; elevated on indices of depression and hyper$ vi ilance and 16; elevated on persistent stress overloadPall in line !ith expected fre&uencies amon nonpatient populations.[*:]

*''lications
#he test is also controversial "ecause of its common use in court$ordered evaluations. [citation
needed]

#his controversy stems, in part, from the limitations of the .orschach, !ith no additional

data, in makin official dia noses from the 0ia!nostic and )tatistical Manual of Mental 0isorders /-4<$5?0.[*E] 5rvin @. Weiner /co$developer !ith Aohn Dxner of the =omprehensive system0 has stated that the .orschach "is a measure of personality functionin , and it provides information concernin aspects of personality structure and dynamics that make people the kind of people they are. 4ometimes such information a"out personality characteristics is helpful in arrivin at a differential dia nosis, if the alternative dia noses "ein considered have "een !ell conceptuali(ed !ith respect to specific or definin personality characteristics". [*C] 5n the vast majority of cases, any!ay, the .orschach test !asn't sin led out "ut used as one of several in a "attery of tests,[:] and despite the criticism of usa e of the .orschach in the courts, out of +,,,, cases in !hich forensic psycholo ists used .orschach$"ased testimony, the appropriateness of the instrument !as challen ed only six times, and the testimony !as ruled inadmissi"le in only one of those cases.[C]One study has found that use of the test in courts has increased "y three times in the decade "et!een 1**E and %,,:, compared to the previous fifty years. [:] Others ho!ever have found that its usa e "y forensic psycholo ists has decreased. [*+]

$rotection o" test items and ethics

Outlines of the ten official ink"lots !ere first made pu"licly availa"le "y William Poundstone in his 1*+6 "ook /i! )ecrets, !hich also descri"ed the method of administerin the test. #he "lots are in the pu"lic domain in most countries, particularly those !ith a copyri ht termof up to C, years "ost mortem auctoris. #he )merican Psycholo ical )ssociation /)P)0 has a code of ethics that supports "freedom of in&uiry and expression" and helpin "the pu"lic in developin informed jud ments". [**] 5t claims that its oals include "the !elfare and protection of the individuals and roups !ith !hom psycholo ists !ork", and it re&uires that psycholo ists "make reasona"le efforts to maintain the inte rity and security of test materials". #he )P) has also raised concerns that the dissemination of test materials mi ht impose "very concrete harm to the eneral pu"lic". 5t has not taken a position on pu"lication of the .orschach plates "ut noted "there are a limited num"er of standardi(ed psycholo ical tests considered appropriate for a iven purpose". [1,,] For example, the .orschach test is capa"le of detectin suicidality.[1,1][1,%][1,6] ) pu"lic statement "y the @ritish Psycholo ical 4ociety expresses similar concerns a"out psycholo ical tests /!ithout mentionin any test "y name0 and considers the "release of [test] materials to un&ualified individuals" to "e misuse if it is a ainst the !ishes of the test pu"lisher. [1,9] 5n his "ook &thics in "sycholo!y, Boocher /1**+0 notes that some "elieve "reprintin copies of the .orschach plates ... and listin

common responses represents a serious unethical act" for psycholo ists and is indicative of "&uestiona"le professional jud ment".[1,:] Other professional associations, such as the 5talian )ssociation of 4trate ic Psychotherapy, recommend that even information a"out the purpose of the test or any detail of its administration should "e kept from the pu"lic, even thou h "cheatin " the test is held to "e practically impossi"le.[1,E] On 4eptem"er *, %,,+, 7o refe attempted to claim copyri ht over the .orschach ink "lots durin fillin s of a complaint !ith the World 5ntellectual Property Or ani(ation a ainst Hey >imon e of @ra(il. #hese complaints !ere denied.[1,C] Further complaints !ere sent to t!o other !e"sites that contained information similar to the .orschach test in <ay %,,* "y le al firm 4chluep and -e en of 4!it(erland.[1,+][1,*] Psycholo ists have sometimes refused to disclose tests and test data to courts !hen asked to do so "y the parties citin ethical reasons3 it is ar ued that such refusals may hinder full understandin of the process "y the attorneys, and impede cross$examination of the experts. )P) ethical standard 1.%6/"0 states that the psycholo ist has a responsi"ility to document processes in detail and of ade&uate &uality to allo! reasona"le scrutiny "y the court. [11,] =ontroversy ensued in the psycholo ical community in %,,* !hen the ori inal .orschach plates and research results on interpretations !ere pu"lished in the ".orschach test" article on Wikipedia.[111] 7o refe Q 7u"er Pu"lishin , a 1erman company that sells editions of the plates, called the pu"lication "un"elieva"ly reckless and even cynical of Wikipedia" and said it !as investi atin the possi"ility of le al action.[111] -r. Aames 7eilman, a =anadian emer ency room physician involved in the de"ate, compared it to the pu"lication of the eye test chart2 thou h people are like!ise free to memori(e the eye chart "efore an eye test, its eneral usefulness as a dia nostic tool for eyesi ht has not diminished.
[111]

For those opposed to exposure, pu"lication of the ink"lots is descri"ed as a "particularly

painful development", iven the tens of thousands of research papers !hich have, over many years, "tried to link a patientKs responses to certain psycholo ical conditions." [111]=ontroversy over Wikipedia's pu"lication of the ink"lots has resulted in the "lots "ein pu"lished in other locations, such as The 1uardianand The 1lobe And Mail.[11%] Pu"lication of the .orschach ima es is also !elcomed "y critics !ho consider the test to "e pseudoscience. @enjamin .adford, editor of)ke"tical 2n$uirer ma a(ine, stated that the .orschach "has remained in use more out of tradition than ood evidence," and !as hopeful that pu"lication of the test may finally hasten its demise.[116]

[edit]Thematic

a''erce'tion test

Main article: Thematic A""erce"tion Test )nother popular projective test is the #hematic )pperception #est /#)#0 in !hich an individual vie!s am"i uous scenes of people, and is asked to descri"e various aspects of the scene3 for example, the su"ject may "e asked to descri"e !hat led up to this scene, the emotions of the characters, and !hat mi ht happen after!ards. #he examiner then evaluates these descriptions, attemptin to discover the conflicts, motivations and attitudes of the respondent. 5n the ans!ers, the respondent "projects" their unconscious attitudes and motivations into the picture, !hich is !hy these are referred to as "projective tests."

#hematic )pperception #est

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Psychology portal

#he Thematic *''erce'tion Test, or T*T, is a projective psycholo ical test. 7istorically, it has "een amon the most !idely used, researched, and tau ht of such tests. 5ts adherents claim that it taps a su"ject's unconscious to reveal repressed aspects of personality, motives and needs for achievement, po!er and intimacy, and pro"lem$ solvin a"ilities.
Contents
[hide]

1 2rocedure Scorin! Systems , (istory 4 *riticisms 5 *ontem#orary a##lications of T6T 6 T6T in #o#ular culture 7 See also & References

$ .'ternal lin0s

[edit]$rocedure #he #)D is popularly kno!n as the "icture inter"retation techni$ue "ecause it uses a standard series of provocative yet am"i uous picturesa"out !hich the su"ject must tell a story. #he su"ject is asked to tell as dramatic a story as they can for each picture presented, includin 2 !hat has led up to the event sho!n !hat is happenin at the moment !hat the characters are feelin and thinkin , and !hat the outcome of the story !as.

5f these elements are omitted, particularly for children or individuals of lo! co nitive a"ilities, the evaluator may ask the su"ject a"out them directly. #here are 61 picture cards in the standard form of the #)#. 4ome of the cards sho! male fi ures, some female, some "oth male and female fi ures, some of am"i uous ender, some adults, some children, and some sho! no human fi ures at all. One is completely "lank. )lthou h the cards !ere ori inally desi ned to "e matched to the su"ject in terms of a e and ender, any card may "e used !ith any su"ject. <ost practitioners choose a set of approximately ten cards, either usin cards that they feel are enerally useful, or that they "elieve !ill encoura e the su"ject's expression of emotional conflicts relevant to their specific history and situation. [edit]&coring
[1]

&ystems

#he #)# is a projective test in that, like the .orschach test, its assessment of the su"ject is "ased on !hat he or she projects onto the am"i uous ima es. #herefore, to complete the assessment each story created "y a su"ject must "e carefully analy(ed to uncover underlyin needs, attitudes, and patterns of reaction. )lthou h most clinical practitioners do not use formal scorin systems, several formal scorin systems have "een developed for analy(in #)# stories systematically and consistently. #!o common methods that are currently used in research are the2 -efense <echanisms <anual -<<[%]. #his assesses three defense mechanisms2 denial /least mature0, projection /intermediate0, andidentification /most mature0. ) person's thou htsFfeelin s are projected in stories involved.

4ocial =o nition and O"ject .elations 4=O.[6] scale. #his assesses four different dimensions of o"ject relations2 =omplexity of .epresentations of People, )ffect$#one of .elationship Paradi ms, =apacity for Dmotional 5nvestment in .elationships and <oral 4tandards, and 8nderstandin of 4ocial =ausality.

[edit]History #)# !as developed "y the )merican psycholo ists 7enry ). <urray and =hristiana -. <or an at 7arvard durin the 1*6,s to explore the underlyin dynamics of personality, such as internal conflicts, dominant drives, interests, and motives. )ccordin to <elville scholar 7o!ard P ?incent, the #)# Lcame into "ein !hen -r. 7enry ). <urray, psycholo ist and <elvillist , adapted the implicit lesson of <elvilleKs [<o"y -ick] L-ou"loonM chapter to a ne! and lar er creative, therapeutic purpose.M )fter World War 55, the #)# !as adopted more "roadly "y psychoanalysts and clinicians to evaluate emotionally distur"ed patients. >ater, in the 1*C,s, the 7uman Potential <ovement encoura ed psycholo ists to use the #)# to help their clients understand themselves "etter and stimulate personal ro!th. [edit]Criticisms -eclinin adherence to the Freudian principle of repression on !hich the test is "ased has caused the #)# to "e criticised as false or outdated "y many professional psycholo ists[citation
needed]

. #heir criticisms are that the #)# is unscientific "ecause it cannot "e proved to "e valid /that

it actually measures !hat it claims to measure0, or relia"le /that it ives consistent results over time, due to the challen e of standardisin interpretations of the stories produced "y su"jects0. 4ome critics of the #)# cards have o"served that the characters and environments are dated, even Jold$fashioned,K creatin a Jcultural or psychosocial distanceK "et!een the patients and these stimuli that makes identifyin !ith them less likely [9]. )lso, in researchin the responses of su"jects iven photo raphs versus the #)#, researchers found that the #)# cards evoked more JdeviantK stories /i.e., more ne ative0 than photo raphs, leadin them to conclude that the difference !as due to the differences in the characteristics of the ima es used as stimuli [citation
needed]

5n a %,,: dissertation,[:] <atthe! Harron, Psy.-. attempted to address these issues "y reproducin a >eopold @ellak [E] 1, card set photo raphically and performin an outcome study. #he results concluded that the old #)# elicited ans!ers that included many more specific time references than the ne! #)#.

[edit]Contem'orary

a''lications o" T*T

-espite criticisms, the #)# remains !idely used as a tool for research into areas of psycholo y such as dreams, fantasies, mate selectionand !hat motivates people to choose their occupation. 4ometimes it is used in a psychiatric or psycholo ical context to assess personality disorders, thou ht disorders, in forensic examinations to evaluate crime suspects, or to screen candidates for hi h$stress occupations. 5t is also commonly used in routine psycholo ical evaluations, typically !ithout a formal scorin system, as a !ay to explore emotional conflicts and o"ject relations [C]. #)# is !idely used in France and )r entina usin a psychodynamic approach. #he 5sraeli army uses the test for evaluatin potential officers.[citation needed] 5t is also used "y the 4ervices 4election @oard of 5ndia.[citation needed] [edit]T*T

in 'o'ular culture

#homas 7arris' novel Red 0ra!on includes a scene !here the imprisoned psychiatrist and serial killer -r. 7anni"al >ecter mocks a previous attempt to administer the test to him.

<ichael =richton included the #)# in the "attery of tests iven to the distur"ed patient and main character 7arry @enson in his novel, The Terminal Man. 5n the <#? cartoon 0aria, -aria and her sister Nuinn are iven a test that appears to "e the #)# "y the school psycholo ist on their first day at their ne! school. -aria and Nuinn are sho!n a picture of t!o people. Nuinn makes up a story a"out the t!o people havin a discussion a"out popularity and datin . -aria states that she sees "a herd of "eautiful !ild ponies runnin free across the plains." #he psycholo ist tells her the picture is of t!o people, not ponies. -aria states, "last time 5 took one of these tests they told me they !ere clouds. #hey said they could "e !hatever 5 !anted." #he psycholo ist explains, "#hat's a different test, dear. 5n this test, they're people and you tell me !hat they're discussin ." #o !hich -aria characteristically replies, "Oh... 5 see. )ll ri ht, then. 5t's a uy and a irl and they're discussin ... a herd of "eautiful !ild ponies runnin free across the plains." [+] /=f. the .orschach test administered to =harly 1ordon in Flo%ers for Al!ernon, durin !hich -rs. Hiemur and 4trauss ask him !hat he "sees" on a card, he replies that he sees an ink"lot, they ask him to pretend that it is somethin else, and he replies that he "pretends" a ta"lecloth !ith an ink pen "leekin " all over it.0 #he #)# is administered to )lex, the main character of A (lock%ork 3ran!e.

=harlie 1ordon, the prota onist in -aniel Beyes' Flo%ers for Al!ernon, notes in his pro ress report 9 on <arch Eth that he !as iven a "#hematic )ppreciation #est." )s he says, "5 dont kno! the frist % !erds "ut 5 kno! !hat test means. Rou ot to pass it or you et "ad marks [sic]"

[edit]Dra+,*,$erson

test

Main article: 0ra%4A4Person Test #he -ra!$)$Person test re&uires the su"ject to dra! a person. #he results are "ased on a psychodynamic interpretation of the details of the dra!in , such as the si(e, shape and complexity of the facial features, clothin and "ack round of the fi ure. )s !ith other projective tests, the approach has very little demonstrated validity and there is evidence that therapists may attri"ute patholo y to individuals !ho are merely poor artists. [1] ) similar class of techni&ues is kinetic family dra!in .

-ra!$)$Person #est
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

4milin person /com"ined head and "ody0 a e 9S.

#he Dra+,*,$erson Test /D*$ , D*$ test, or -oodenough,Harris Dra+,*,$erson Test0 is a psycholo ical projective personality or co nitive test used to evaluate children and adolescents for a variety of purposes.
Contents
[hide]

1 (istory /ature of the test , See also 4 /otes and References

[edit]History -eveloped ori inally "y Florence 1oodenou h in 1*%E, this test !as first kno!n as the 1oodenou h -ra!$)$<an test. 5t is detailed in her "ook titled Measurement of 2ntelli!ence by 0ra%in!s. -r. -ale @. 7arris later revised and extended the test and it is no! kno!n as the1oodenou!h4-arris 0ra%in! Test. #he revision and extension is detailed in his "ook (hildren,s 0ra%in!s as Measures of 2ntellectual Maturity/1*E60. Psycholo ist Aulian Aaynes, in the 1*CE "ook, The 3ri!in of (onsciousness in the /reakdo%n of the /icameral Mind !rote that the test is "routinely administered as an indicator of schi(ophrenia," and that !hile not all schi(ophrenic patients have trou"le dra!in a person, !hen they do, it is very clear evidence of a disorder. )nd that such si ns mi ht "e a patient's ne lect to include "o"vious anatomical parts like hands and eyes," !ith ""lurred and unconnected lines," am"i uous sexuality and eneral distortion.[1] #here has "een no validation of this test as indicative of schi(ophrenia. =hapman and =hapman /1*E*0, in a classic study of illusory correlation, sho!ed that the scorin manual, e. ., lar e eyes as indicative of paranoia, could "e enerated from the naive "eliefs of under raduates. [edit]#ature

o" the test

#est administration involves the administrator re&uestin children to complete three individual dra!in s on separate pieces of paper. =hildren are asked to dra! a man, a !oman, and themselves. Ho further instructions are iven and the child is free to make the dra!in in !hichever !ay heFshe !ould like. #here is no ri ht or !ron type of dra!in , althou h the child must make a dra!in of a !hole person each time $ i.e. head to feet, not just the face. #he test has no time limit, ho!ever, children rarely take lon er than a"out 1, or 1: minutes to complete all three dra!in s. 7arris's "ook /1*E60 provides scorin scales !hich are used to examine and score the child's dra!in s. #he test is completely non$invasive and non$threatenin to children $ !hich is part of its appeal. #o evaluate intelli ence, the test administrator uses the -ra!$a$Person2 N44 /Nuantitative 4corin 4ystem0. #his system analy(es fourteen different aspects of the dra!in s, such as

specific "ody parts and clothin , for various criteria, includin presence or a"sence, detail, and proportion. 5n all, there are E9 scorin items for each dra!in . ) separate standard score is recorded for each dra!in , and a total score for all three. #he use of a nonver"al, nonthreatenin task to evaluate intelli ence is intended to eliminate possi"le sources of "ias "y reducin varia"les like primary lan ua e, ver"al skills, communication disa"ilities, and sensitivity to !orkin under pressure. 7o!ever, test results can "e influenced "y previous dra!in experience, a factor that may account for the tendency of middle$class children to score hi her on this test than lo!er$class children, !ho often have fe!er opportunities to dra!. #o assess the test$taker for emotional pro"lems, the administrator uses the -ra!$a$Person2 4PD- /4creenin Procedure for Dmotional -istur"ance0 to score the dra!in s. #his system is composed of t!o types of criteria. For the first type, ei ht dimensions of each dra!in are evaluated a ainst norms for the child's a e roup. For the second type, 9C different items are considered for each dra!in . #he purpose of the test is to assist professionals in inferrin children's co!niti#e de#elo"mental le#els !ith little or no influence of other factors such as lan ua e "arriers or special needs. )ny other uses of the test are merely projective and are not endorsed "y the first creator. [edit]&ee

also
com'letion test

[edit]&entence

Main article: )entence com"letion tests 4entence completion tests re&uire the su"ject complete sentence "stems" !ith their o!n !ords. #he su"ject's response is considered to "e a projection of their conscious andFor unconscious attitudes,personality characteristics, motivations, and "eliefs.

4entence completion tests

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

&entence com'letion tests are a class of semi$structured projective techni&ues. 4entence completion tests typically provide respondents !ith "e innin s of sentences, referred to as Lstems,M and respondents then complete the sentences in !ays that are meanin ful to them. #he responses are "elieved to provide indications of attitudes, "eliefs, motivations, or other mental states. #here is de"ate over !hether or not sentence completion tests elicit responses from conscious thou ht rather than unconscious states. #his de"ate !ould affect !hether sentence completion tests can "e strictly cate ori(ed as projective tests. ) sentence completion test form may "e relatively short, such as those used to assess responses to advertisements, or much lon er, such as those used to assess personality. ) lon sentence

completion test is the Forer 4entence =ompletion #est, !hich has 1,, stems. #he tests are usually administered in "ooklet form !here respondents complete the stems "y !ritin !ords on paper. #he structures of sentence completion tests vary accordin to the len th and relative enerality and !ordin of the sentence stems. 4tructured tests have lon er stems that lead respondents to more specific types of responses3 less structured tests provide shorter stems, !hich produce a !ider variety of responses.
Contents
[hide]

1 (istory 3ses , .'am#les of sentence com#letion tests 4 -ata analysis, "alidity and relia1ility 5 References

[edit]History 7erman ?on D""in haus is enerally credited !ith developin the first sentence completion test in 1+*C.[1] D""in hausKs sentence completion test !as used as part of an intelli ence test. [%] =arl Aun Ks !ord association test may also have "een a precursor to modern sentence completion tests. 5n recent decades, sentence completion tests have increased in usa e, in part "ecause they are easy to develop and easy to administer. )s of the 1*+,s, sentence completion tests !ere the seventh most !idely used personality assessment instruments. [6] )nother reason for the increased usa e of sentence completion tests is "ecause of their superiority to other measures in uncoverin conflicted attitudes. [9] 4ome sentence completion tests !ere developed as a !ay to overcome the pro"lems associated !ith thematic apperception measures of the same constructs. [:] [edit]%ses

#he uses of sentence completion tests include personality analysis, clinical applications, attitude assessment, achievement motivation, and measurement of other constructs. #hey are used in several disciplines, includin psycholo y, mana ement, education, and marketin . 4entence completion measures have also "een incorporated into non$projective applications, such as intelli ence tests, lan ua e comprehension, and lan ua e and co nitive development tests.[E] [edit]

!am'les o" sentence com'letion tests

#here are many sentence completion tests availa"le for use "y researchers. 4ome of the most !idely used sentence completion tests include2 .otter 5ncomplete 4entence @lank /assesses personality traits3 perhaps the most !idely used of all sentence completion tests0. <iner 4entence =ompletion #est /measures mana erial motivations0. Washin ton 8niversity 4entence =ompletion #est /measures e o development0.

[edit]Data

analysis. validity and reliability

#he data collected from sentence completion tests can usually "e analy(ed either &uantitatively or &ualitatively.[C] 4entence completion tests usually include some formal codin procedure or manual. #he validity of each sentence completion test must "e determined independently and this depends on the instructions laid out in the scorin manual. =ompared to positivist instruments, such as >ikert$type scales, sentence completion tests tend to have hi h face validity /i.e., the extent to !hich measurement items accurately reflect the concept "ein measured0. #his is to "e expected, "ecause in many cases the sentence stems name or refer to specific o"jects and the respondent is provides responses specifically focused on such o"jects. [edit]Re"erences

[edit]%ses

in marketing

Projective techni&ues, includin #)#s, are used in &ualitative marketin research, for example to help identify potential associations "et!een"rand ima es and the emotions they may provoke. 5n

advertisin , projective tests are used to evaluate responses to advertisements. #he tests have also "een used in mana ement to assess achievement motivation and other drives, in sociolo y to assess the adoption of innovations, and in anthropolo y to study cultural meanin . #he application of responses is different in these disciplines than in psycholo y, "ecause the responses of multiple respondents are rouped to ether for analysis "y the or anisation commissionin the research, rather than interpretin the meanin of the responses iven "y a sin le su"ject.

olt(man 5nk"lot #est

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article needs additional citations for verification#

2lease hel# im#ro"e this article 1y addin! relia1le references. 3nsourced material may 1e challen!ed and remo"ed.(July 2009)

The Holt/man Inkblot Test, conceived "y Wayne 7olt(man, is a projective personality test similar to the .orschach test. #he 7olt(man 5nk"lot #est !as invented to correct many, if not all, of the controversial issues aroused "y the .orschach 5nk"lot #est. #he test consists of t!o alternate forms of forty$five ink"lots, ori inally dra!n from a pool of several thousand. 4corin is "ased on t!enty$t!o items2 reaction time, rejection, location, space, form definiteness, form appropriateness, color, shadin , movement, patho nomonicver"ali(ation, inte ration, content /human, animal, anatomy, sexual, or a"stract0, anxiety, hostility, "arrier, penetration, "alance, and popularity. 4corin takes a very lon time if the test is not administered "y computer. #he 7olt(man 5nk"lot #est is used primarily !ith students, children, and !ith patients sufferin from schi(ophrenia, head trauma or depression. #he 7olt(man 5nk"lot #est has "een used in "oth experimental and clinical applications.[citation needed] #he techni&ue is featured as part of a travellin exhi"ition entitled "Psycholo y2 8nderstandin Ourselves, 8nderstandin Dach Other" and sponsored "y the )merican Psycholo ical )ssociation in partnership !ith the Ontario 4cience =entre. 5t is housed permanently at the4mithsonian 5nstitution.[1]

Objective tests (Rating scale or self-report measure)

O"jective tests have a restricted response format, such as allo!in for true or false ans!ers or ratin usin an ordinal scale. Prominent examples of o"jective personality tests include the <innesota <ultiphasic Personality 5nventory, <illon =linical <ultiaxial 5nventory$555,[6] =hild @ehavior =hecklist,[9] and the @eck -epression 5nventory.[:] O"jective personality tests can "e desi ned for use in "usiness for potential employees, such as the HDO$P5, the 1EPF, and the OPN /Occupational Personality Nuestionnaire0, all of !hich are "ased on the @i Fivetaxonomy. #he @i Five, or Five Factor <odel of normal personality, has ained acceptance since the early 1**,s !hen some influential meta$analyses /e. ., @arrick Q <ount 1**10 found consistent relationships "et!een the @i Five personality factors and important criterion varia"les. )nother personality test "ased upon the Five Factor <odel is the Five Factor Personality 5nventory $ =hildren /FFP5$=.0.[E]

<innesota <ultiphasic Personality 5nventory

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Minnesota Multi'hasic $ersonality Inventory /<<P50 is one of the most fre&uently used personality tests in mental health. #he test is used "y trained professionals to assist in identifyin personality structure and psychopatholo y.
Contents
[hide]

1 (istory and de"elo#ment

o o o o o o o o

1.1 ))2= 1. ))2=> 1., ))2=>6 1.4 ))2=> RF *urrent scale com#osition .1 *linical scales . 5alidity scales ., *ontent scales .4 2SD>5 scales , Scorin! and inter#retation 4 *riticism and contro"ersy

o o

4.1 R* and *linical Scales 4. +ees>(aley AFa0e <adA Scale

5 /otes 6 See also 7 .'ternal lin0s

[edit]History

and develo'ment

#he ori inal authors of the <<P5 !ere 4tarke .. 7atha!ay, Ph-, and A. =. <cBinley, <-. #he <<P5 is copyri hted "y the 8niversity of <innesota. #he standardi(ed ans!er sheets can "e hand scored !ith templates that fit over the ans!er sheets, "ut most tests are computer scored. =omputer scorin pro rams for the current standardi(ed version, the <<P5$%, are licensed "y the 8niversity of <innesota Press to Pearson )ssessments and other companies located in different countries. #he computer scorin pro rams offer a ran e of scorin profile choices includin the extended score report, !hich includes data on the ne!est and most psychometrically advanced scalesPthe .estructured =linical 4cales /.= scales0. [1] #he extended score report also provides scores on the more traditionally used =linical 4cales as !ell as =ontent, 4upplementary, and other su"scales of potential interest to clinicians. 8se of the <<P5 is ti htly controlled for ethical and financial reasons. #he clinician usin the <<P5 has to pay for materials and for scorin and report services, as !ell as a char e to install the computeri(ed pro ram. #he tests are mentioned in #homas 7arris' 1*++ novel The )ilence of the 5ambs, "y character (larice )tarlin!, as ones she is familiar !ith. [edit]MM$I #he ori inal <<P5 !as developed in 1*6* /1roth <arnat, 7and"ook of Psycholo ical )ssessment, %,,*0 usin an empirical keyin approach, !hich means that the clinical scales !ere derived "y selectin items that !ere endorsed "y patients kno!n to have "een dia nosed !ith certain patholo ies.[%][6][9][:][E] #he difference "et!een this approach and other test development strate ies used around that time !as that it !as atheoretical /not "ased on any particular theory0 and thus the initial test !as not ali ned !ith the prevailin psychodynamic theories of that time. #he atheoretical approach to <<P5 development ostensi"ly ena"led the test to capture aspects of human psychopatholo y that !ere reco ni(a"le and meanin ful despite chan es in clinical theories. 7o!ever, "ecause the <<P5 scales !ere created "ased on a roup !ith kno!n psychopatholo ies, the scales themselves are not atheoretical "y !ay of usin the participants' clinical dia noses to determine the scales' contents. [edit]MM$I,0 #he first major revision of the <<P5 !as the <<P5$%, !hich !as standardi(ed on a ne! national sample of adults in the 8nited 4tates and released in 1*+*. [C] 5t is appropriate for use !ith adults

1+ and over. 4u"se&uent revisions of certain test elements have "een pu"lished, and a !ide variety of su"scales !as also introduced over many years to help clinicians interpret the results of the ori inal clinical scales, !hich had "een found to contain a eneral factor that made interpretation of scores on the clinical scales difficult. #he current <<P5$% has :EC items, all true$ or$false format, and usually takes "et!een 1 and % hours to complete dependin on readin level. #here is an infre&uently used a""reviated form of the test that consists of the <<P5$%'s first 6C, items[+]. #he shorter version has "een mainly used in circumstances that have not allo!ed the full version to "e completed /e. ., illness or time pressure0, "ut the scores availa"le on the shorter version are not as extensive as those availa"le in the :EC$item version. [edit]MM$I,* ) version of the test desi ned for adolescents, the <<P5$), !as released in 1**%. [*] #he <<P5$) has 9C+ items, !ith a short form of 6:, items. [edit]MM$I,0

RF

) ne! and psychometrically improved version of the <<P5$% has recently "een developed employin ri orous statistical methods that !ere used to develop the .= 4cales in %,,6. [1,] #he ne! <<P5$% .estructured Form /<<P5$%$.F0 has no! "een released "y Pearson )ssessments. #he <<P5$%$.F produces scores on a theoretically rounded, hierarchically structured set of scales, includin the .= 4cales. #he modern methods used to develop the <<P5$%$.F !ere not availa"le at the time the <<P5 !as ori inally developed. #he <<P5$%$.F "uilds on the foundation of the .= 4cales, !hich have "een extensively researched since their pu"lication in %,,6. Pu"lications on the <<P5$%$.= 4cales include "ook chapters, multiple pu"lished articles in peer$revie!ed journals, and address the use of the scales in a !ide ran e of settin s. [11][1%][16][19][1:]
[1E][1C][1+][1*][%,][%1][%%][%6]

#he <<P5$%$.F scales rest on an assumption that psychopatholo y is a

[%9][%:][%E][%C][%+][%*][6,]

homo enous condition that is additive. [edit]Current [edit]Clinical

scale com'osition

scales

4cale 1 /formerly kno!n as the 7ypochondriasis 4cale0 2 <easures a person's perception of their health or actual injuries or health issues., 4cale % /formerly kno!n as the -epression 4cale0 2 <easures a person's discoura ement level., 4cale 6 /formerly kno!n as the 7ysteria 4cale0 2 <easures the emotionality of a person., 4cale 9 /formerly kno!n as the Psychopathic -eviate 4cale0 2 <easures a person's need for control or their re"ellion a ainst control., 4cale : /formerly kno!n as the FemininityF<asculinity 4cale0 2 <easures a stereotype of a person and ho! they compare. For men it !ould "e the <arl"oro man, for !omen it !ould "e Aune =leaver or -onna .eed., 4cale E /formerly kno!n as the Paranoia 4cale0 2 <easures a person's a"ility to trust.,

4cale C /formerly kno!n as the Psychestenia 4cale0 2 <easures !hether someone made it into adulthood !ith or !ithout unresolved issues., 4cale + /formerly kno!n as the 4chi(ophrenia 4cale0 2 <easures a person's a"ility to have ori inal or uni&ue thou hts and !hether they can think outside the "ox., 4cale * /formerly kno!n as the <ania 4cale0 2 <easures a person's psychic ener y., scale , /formerly kno!n as the 4ocial 5ntroversion 4cale0 2 <easures !hether people like to "e around other people. #he ori inal clinical scales !ere desi ned to measure common dia noses of the era. While the descriptions of each type !ere ori inally used in assessment, the current practice is to use the num"ers only. $o# of Items

$um!er %!!reviation

Description

& at is 'easured

(s

(y#ochondriasis

*oncern with 1odily sym#toms

-e#ression

-e#ressi"e Sym#toms

57

(y

(ysteria

6wareness of #ro1lems and "ulnera1ilities

68

2d

2sycho#athic -e"iate

*onflict, stru!!le, an!er, res#ect for societyBs 58 rules

)F

)asculinityEFemininity

Stereoty#ical masculine or feminine interestsE1eha"iors

56

2a

2aranoia

+e"el of trust, sus#iciousness, sensiti"ity

48

2t

2sychasthenia

;orry, 6n'iety, tension, dou1ts, o1sessi"eness

4&

&

Sc

SchiFo#hrenia

Gdd thin0in! and social alienation

7&

)a

(y#omania

+e"el of e'cita1ility

46

Si

Social =ntro"ersion

2eo#le orientation

6$

=odetypes are a com"ination of the one or t!o hi hest$scorin clinical scales /ex. $ +, 9+0. =odetypes and interaction of clinical scales can "e &uite complex and re&uire speciali(ed trainin to properly interpret. [edit])alidity

scales

#he validity scales in the <<P5$% .F are minor revisions of those contained in the <<P5$%, !hich includes three "asic types of validity measures2 those that !ere desi ned to detect non$ respondin or inconsistent respondin /=H4, ?.5H, #.5H0, those desi ned to detect !hen clients are over reportin or exa eratin the prevalence or severity of psycholo ical symptoms /F, F", Fp, F@40, and those desi ned to detect !hen test$takers are underreportin or do!nplayin psycholo ical symptoms />, B00. ) ne! addition to the validity scales for the <<P5$% .F includes an over reportin scale of somatic symptoms scale /Fs0. $ew in version

%!!reviation

Description

%ssesses

A*annot SayA

Iuestions not answered

+ie

*lient Afa0in! !oodA

=nfrequency

*lient Afa0in! 1adA 9in first half of test:

-efensi"eness

-enialE."asi"eness

F1

<ac0 F

*lient Afa0in! 1adA 9in last half of test:

5R=/

5aria1le Res#onse =nconsistency

answerin! similarEo##osite question #airs inconsistently

TR=/

True Res#onse =nconsistency answerin! questions all trueEall false

F>J

F minus J

honesty of test res#onsesEnot fa0in! !ood or

1ad

Su#erlati"e Self>2resentation

im#ro"in! u#on J scale, Aa##earin! e'cessi"ely !oodA

F#

F>2sycho#atholo!y

Frequency of #resentation in clinical settin!

Fs

RF

=nfrequent Somatic Res#onse G"erre#ortin! of somatic sym#toms

[edit]Content

scales

#o supplement these multidimensional scales and to assist in interpretin the fre&uently seen diffuse elevations due to the eneral factor /removed in the .= scales0 [61][6%] !ere also developed, !ith the more fre&uently used "ein the su"stance a"use scales /<)=$., )P4, ))40, desi ned to assess the extent to !hich a client admits to or is prone to a"usin su"stances, and the ) /anxiety0 and . /repression0 scales, developed "y Welsh after conductin a factor analysis of the ori inal <<P5 item pool. -o(ens of content scales currently exist, the follo!in are some samples2 %!!reviation Description

.s

.!o Stren!th Scale

G(

G"er>*ontrolled (ostility Scale

)6*

)ac6ndrews 6lcoholism Scale

)6*>R

)ac6ndrews 6lcoholism Scale Re"ised

-o

-ominance Scale

62S

6ddictions 2otential Scale

66S

6ddictions 6c0nowled!ement Scale

SG-

Social -iscomfort Scale

6n'iety Scale

Re#ression Scale

T26

Ty#e 6 Scale

)-S

)arital -istress Scale

[edit]$&1,2

scales

8nlike the =ontent and 4upplementary scales, the P4R$: scales !ere not developed as a reaction to some actual or perceived shortcomin in the <<P5$% itself, "ut rather as an attempt to connect the instrument !ith more eneral trend in personality psycholo y. [66] #he five factor model of human personality has ained reat acceptance in non$patholo ical populations, and the P4R$: scales differ from the : factors identified in non$patholo ical populations in that they !ere meant to determine the extent to !hich personality disorders mi ht manifest and "e reco ni(a"le in clinical populations. #he five components !ere la"eled He ative Dmotionality /HD1D0, Psychoticism /P4R=0, 5ntroversion /5H#.0, -isconstraint /-54=0 and ) /)11.0. [edit]&coring ressiveness

and inter'retation

>ike many standardi(ed tests, scores on the various scales of the <<P5$% and the <<P5$%$.F are not representative of either percentile rank or ho! "!ell" or "poorly" someone has done on the test. .ather, analysis looks at relative elevation of factors compared to the various norm roups studied. .a! scores on the scales are transformed into a standardi(ed metric kno!n as #$scores /<ean or )vera e e&uals :,,4tandard -eviation e&uals 1,0, makin interpretation easier for clinicians. #est manufacturers and pu"lishers ask test purchasers to prove they are &ualified to purchase the <<P5F<<P5$%F<<P5$%$.F and other tests[citation needed]. [edit]Criticism [edit]RC

and controversy

and Clinical &cales

4ome &uestions have "een raised a"out the .= 4cales and the forthcomin release of the <<P5$%$.F, !hich eliminates the older clinical scales entirely in favor of the more psychometrically appealin .= scales. #he replacement of the ori inal =linical 4cales !ith the .= scales has not "een met !ith universal approval, and has !arranted enou h discussion to prompt a special issue of the academic Aournal of Personality )ssessment /?ol +C, 5ssue %, Octo"er %,,E0 to provide each side !ith a forum to voice their opinions re ardin the old and ne! measures. 5ndividuals in favor of retainin the older =linical scales have ar ued that the ne! .= scales are measurin patholo y !hich is markedly different than that measured "y the ori inal clinical scales.[69][6:] #his claim is not supported "y results of research, !hich has found the .= scales to "e cleaner, more pure versions of the ori inal clinical scales "ecause 10 the interscale correlations are reatly reduced and no items are contained in more than one .= scale and, %0 common variance spread across the older clinical scales due to a eneral factor common to psychopatholo y is parsed out and contained in a separate scale measurin demorali(ation /.=dem0.[6E][6C] =ritics of the ne! scales ar ue that the removal of this common variance makes the .= scales less ecolo ically valid /less like real life0 "ecause real patients tend to present complex patterns of symptoms. 7o!ever, this issue is addressed "y "ein a"le to vie! elevations on other .= scales that are less saturated !ith the eneral factor and, therefore, are also more transparent and much easier to interpret. =ritics of the .= scales assert they have deviated too far from the ori inal clinical scales, the implication "ein that previous research done on the clinical scales !ill no lon er "e relevant to the interpretation of the .= scales and the "urden of proof should "e on the .= scales to demonstrate they are clearly superior to the ori inal clinical scales. Proponents of the .= scales assert that research has ade&uately addressed those issues !ith results indicatin that the .= scales predict patholo y in their desi nated areas "etter than their concordant ori inal clinical scales !hile usin si nificantly fe!er items and maintainin e&ual to hi her internal consistency relia"ility and validity, and are not !eaker at identifyin the core elements of the ori inal clinical scales3 further, unlike the ori inal clinical scales, the .= scales are not saturated !ith the primary factor /demorali(ation, no! captured in .=dem0 !hich fre&uently produced diffuse elevations and made interpretation of results difficult3 finally, the .= scales have lo!er interscale correlations and, in contrast to the ori inal clinical scales, contain no interscale item overlap. [6+] ) more "asic criticism is that the <<P5$% .F scales rest on an assumption that psychopatholo y is a homo enous condition that is additive. )lthou h symptoms are mainly homo enous, most psychodia nostic conditions such as hysteria, P#4-, -5- are composed of defenses,

contradictory states, and seemin ly unrelated si ns and symptoms that can not "e measured "y scales that !ere made to have hi h internal consistency. [edit]Lees,Haley

3Fake 4ad3 &cale

#he follo!in discussion concerns the >ees$7aley "fake "ad" scale3 there are several other "fake "ad" scales /aside from the standard F and F" scales, !hich are the ori inal "fake "ad" scales0 that have "een in existence since 1*:,, and !hich have not "een su"ject to the same kind of controversy as the >ees$7aley "fake "ad" scale. #hese include the F$B scale
[6*]

, the 1ou h
[91]

-issimilation index /-s$r0 [9,], and the Wiener$7armon 4u"tle and O"vious 4cales /4$O0

5n <arch %,,+ a front pa e article in the Wall 4treet Aournal[9%] exposed !hat it claimed to "e the lack of scientific validity of the >ees$7aley "fake "ad" scale, !hich is used in courts as ar ument for malin erin in injury liti ation. )ccordin to the article, t!o Florida jud es "arred use of the scale after special hearin s on its scientific validity. #he article reports that this particular "fake "ad" scale !as developed "y psycholo ist Paul >ees$ 7aley, !ho !orks mainly for defendants /insurance companies etc.0 in personal injury cases. #he article reports that in 1**1 >ees$7aley paid to have an article supportive of his scale pu"lished in Psycholo ical .eports, !hich the Wall 4treet Aournal descri"ed as "a small <ontana$"ased medical journal." #he scale !as introduced in <<P5 after a revie! of the literature. #his revie! !as considered fla!ed "y its critics "ecause at least 1, of 1* studies revie!ed !ere done "y >ees$7aley or other insurance defense psycholo ists, !hile %1 other studies critical of the test !ere excluded from the revie!. One of the critics of the >ees$7aley "fake "ad" scale is retired psycholo ist Aames @utcher, !ho found that more than 9: percent of psychiatric patients he studied had >ees$7aley Fake @ad 4cale scores of %, or more, !hich accordin to the >ees$7aley "fake "ad" scale meant they !ere malin erin . @utcher contends that it is unlikely that so many psychiatric patients misled doctors. #he article &uotes @utcher concludin 2

This is !reat for insurance com#anies, 1ut not !reat for #eo#le.

7o!ever, @utcher's o!n study has "een critici(ed on methodolo ical and conceptual rounds, includin the likelihood that his su"ject pool included many malin erers, that he i nored recommended ender$related cut$offs, and used a less sensitive or specific <<P5$% scale as his ' old$standard.' [96]

-espite the reservations of the <<P5$% and <<P5$. authors /includin Aames @utcher0 !ho have a de ree of proprietary control over the test, an independent professional panel recommended that the >ees$7aley F@4 "e included in the standard Pearson scorin system. 4everal studies "y independent Heuropsycholo ists have since "een pu"lished in respected peer$revie!ed journals supportin the >ees$7aley F@4 scale as hi hly sensitive and specific /!hen proper cut$offs are used0 in identifyin individuals !ho are exa eratin somatic symptoms
[9:] [99]

/as opposed to psychiatric, mood, or neurolo ical symptoms0 in settin s !here the "ase$rate of malin erin is typically hi h /liti ation, pain clinics, etc.0, as it !as desi ned to do.

#he >ees$7aley "fake "ad" scale is no! re arded "y some authors as a ' old standard' in such populations. [9E]

<illon =linical <ultiaxial 5nventory

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
/.edirected from <illon =linical <ultiaxial 5nventory$5550

#he Millon Clinical Multia!ial Inventory,III /<=<5$5550 is a psycholo ical assessment tool intended to provide information onpsychopatholo y, includin specific disorders outlined in the -4<$5?. 5t is intended for adults /1+ and over0 !ith at least an +th rade readin level. #he <=<5 !as developed and standardised specifically on clinical populations /i.e. patients in psychiatric hospitals or people !ith existin mental health pro"lems0, and the authors are very specific that it should not "e used !ith the eneral population. 7o!ever, there is a stron evidence "ase that sho!s that it still retains validity on non$clinical populations, and so psycholo ists !ill often administer the test to mem"ers of the eneral population. 5t is composed of 1C: true$false &uestions that reportedly takes %:$6, minutes to complete. 5t !as created "y #heodore <illon, =arrie <illon, .o er -avis, and 4eth 1rossman. #he test is modeled on four scales 19 Personality -isorder 4cales 1, =linical 4yndrome 4cales : =orrection 4cales2 6 <odifyin 5ndices /!hich determine the patient's response style and can detect random respondin 03 % .andom .esponse 5ndicatiors 9% 1rossman Personality Facet 4cales /"ased on 4eth 1rossman's theories of personality and psychopatholo y0 [1]

#he test !as normed on a sample of **+ male and female adults !ith a !ide variety of clinical disorders.
Contents
[hide]

1 Scorin! system =nter#retati on , See also 4 References 5 .'ternal lin0s

[edit]&coring

system

Patients' ra! scores are converted to @ase .ate /@.0 scores to allo! comparison "et!een the personality indices. #he @ase .ate scores are essentially !here each score fits on a scale of 1$ 11:, !ith E, "ein the median score. =onversion to a @ase .ate score is relatively complex, and there are certain corrections that are administered "ased on each patient's response style. #he <odifyin indices are scored usin a complex system in !hich the patient's responses in the other scales are compared and the ra! and @. scores are taken from this. #he ?alidity index is an exception to this. 5t consists of three &uestions, and so is scored "et!een , and 6. 5t is not converted to a @. score. [edit]Inter'retation #he modifyin indices consist of 9 scales $ the ?alidity scale /?0, the -isclosure 4cale /I0, the -esira"ility 4cale /R0 and the -e"asement 4cale /T0. #hey are used to determine a patient's response style, such as !hether they !ere keen to present themselves in a positive li ht /indicated "y an elevation on the -esira"ility scale0 or exa erate the ne ative aspects of themselves /indicated "y the -e"asement scale0. 5t also is used to measure !hether the patient !as open in the assessment, or if they !ere un!illin to disclose details a"out themselves /the -isclosure 4cale0. #hese are compared a ainst each other to ain an understandin of the patient's response style. For instance, elevated scores on the -isclosure and -esira"ility scales su est a "cry for help" response style.

#he -isclosure scale is the only scale in the <=<5$555 in !hich the ra! scores are interpreted and in !hich a particularly lo! score is clinically relevant. ) ra! score a"ove 1C+ or "elo! 69 is considered to not "e an accurate representation of the patient's personality style as they either over$ or under$disclosed. #he ?alidity 5ndex consists of just three &uestions in !hich a response of "#rue" is extremely unlikely, such as "5 !as on the front cover of several ma a(ines last year." While only consistin of 6 &uestions, the scale is very sensitive to random respondin . ) score of % or 6 on this scale !ould render the test invalid. For the Personality and =linical 4yndrome scales, scores of C:$+9 are taken to indicate personality trait, or /for the =linical 4yndromes scales0 the presence of a clinical syndrome. 4cores of +: or a"ove indicate the "ersistence of a personality trait or a clinical syndrome. [edit]&ee

also

=hild @ehavior =hecklist

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

#he Child 4ehavior Checklist /=@=>0 is a !idely$used method of identifyin pro"lem "ehavior in children.[1][%] 5t is a component in the )chen"ach 4ystem of Dmperically @ased )ssessment. Pro"lems are identified "y a respondent !ho kno!s the child !ell, usually a parent or teacher. #here are t!o versions of the checklist. #he preschool checklist /=@=>F1S$:0 is intended for use !ith children a ed 1+ months to : years. #he school$a e version /=@=>FE$1+0 is for children a ed E to 1+ years. #he checklists consists of a num"er of statements a"out the child's "ehavior, e. . Acts too youn! for his6her a!e. .esponses are recorded on a >ikert scale2 , U Hot #rue, 1 U 4ome!hat or 4ometimes #rue, % U ?ery #rue or Often #rue. #he preschool checklist contains 1,, &uestions and the school$a e checklist contains 1%, &uestions. 4imilar &uestions are rouped into a num"er of syndromes, e. . A!!ressi#e beha#ior, and their scores are summed to produce a score for that syndrome. 4ome syndromes are further summed to provide scores for 5nternali(in and Dxternali(in pro"lem scales. ) total score from all &uestions is also derived. For each syndrome, pro"lem scale and the total score, ta"les are iven that determine !hether the score represents normal, borderline, or clinical "ehavior. #hese cate ori(ations are "ased on &uantiles from a normative sample.[citation needed]

@eck -epression 5nventory

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Psyc olo*y

(istory of #sycholo!y <ranches of #sycholo!y

Basic science
61normal + <eha"ioral neuroscience *o!niti"e + -e"elo#mental .'#erimental + ."olutionary )athematical + /euro#sycholo!y 2ersonality + 2ositi"e 2sycho#hysics + Social Trans#ersonal

%pplied science
*linical + .ducational Forensic + (ealth =ndustrial and or!aniFational Gccu#ational health School + S#ort + )ilitary

,ists
Gutline + 2u1lications To#ics + Thera#ies

Portal
"KdKe

#he 4eck De'ression Inventory /4DI, 4DI,II0, created "y -r. )aron #. @eck, is a %1$ &uestion multiple$choice self$report inventory, one of the most !idely used instruments for measurin the severity ofdepression. 5ts development marked a shift amon health care professionals, !ho had until then vie!ed depression from a psychodynamic perspective, instead of it "ein rooted in the patient's o!n thou hts. 5n its current version the &uestionnaire is desi ned for individuals a ed 16 and over, and is composed of items relatin to symptoms of depression such as hopelessness and irrita"ility, co nitions such as uilt or feelin s of "ein punished, as !ell as physical symptoms such as fati ue, !ei ht loss, and lack of interest in sex.[1] #here are three versions of the @-5Pthe ori inal @-5, first pu"lished in 1*E1 and later revised in 1*C+ as the @-5$1), and the @-5$55, pu"lished in 1**E. #he @-5 is !idely used as an assessment tool "y health care professionals and researchers in a variety of settin s.
Contents
[hide]

1 -e"elo#ment and history <-=

o
, <-=>==

.1 <-=>=6

o
4 =m#act

,.1 Two>factor a##roach to de#ression

5 +imitations 6 See also 7 /otes & Further readin! $ .'ternal lin0s

[edit]Develo'ment

and history

7istorically, depression !as descri"ed in psychodynamic terms as "inverted hostility a ainst the self".[%] @y contrast, the @-5 !as developed in a novel !ay for its time3 "y collatin patients' ver"atim descriptions of their symptoms and usin these to structure a scale !hich could reflect the intensity or severity of a iven symptom.[1]

#hrou hout his !ork, @eck dre! attention to the importance of "ne ative co nitions"2 sustained, inaccurate, and often intrusive ne ative thou hts a"out the self. [6] 5n his vie!, it !as the case that these co nitions caused depression, rather than "ein enerated by depression.

@eck developed a triad of ne ative co nitions a"out the !orld, the future, and the self, !hich play a major role in depression. )n example of the triad in action taken from @ro!n /1**:0 is the case of a student o"tainin poor exam results2 #he student has ne ative thou hts a"out the +orld, so he may come to "elieve he does not enjoy the class. #he student has ne ative thou hts a"out his "uture, "ecause he thinks he may not pass the class. #he student has ne ative thou hts a"out his sel", as he may feel he does not deserve to "e in colle e.[9] #he development of the @-5 reflects that in its structure, !ith items such as "5 have lost all of my interest in other people" to reflect the !orld, "5 feel discoura ed a"out the future" to reflect the future, and "5 "lame myself for everythin "ad that happens" to reflect the self. #he vie! of depression as sustained "y intrusive ne ative co nitions has had particular application in co nitive "ehavioral therapy /=@#0, !hich aims to challen e and neutrali(e them throu h techni&ues such as co nitive restructurin . [edit]4DI #he ori inal @-5, first pu"lished in 1*E1[:], consisted of t!enty$one &uestions a"out ho! the su"ject has "een feelin in the last !eek. Dach &uestion has a set of at least four possi"le ans!er choices, ran in in intensity. For example2 /,0 5 do not feel sad. /10 5 feel sad. /%0 5 am sad all the time and 5 can't snap out of it. /60 5 am so sad or unhappy that 5 can't stand it.

When the test is scored, a value of , to 6 is assi ned for each ans!er and then the total score is compared to a key to determine the depression's severity. #he standard cut$offs are as follo!s2 ,G* indicates that a person is not depressed, 1,G1+ indicates mild$moderate depression, 1*G%* indicates moderate$severe depression and 6,GE6 indicates severe depression. 7i her total scores indicate more severe depressive symptoms.

4ome items on the @-5 have more than one statement marked !ith the same score. For instance, there are t!o responses under the <ood headin that score a 72 /%a0 2 am blue or sad all the time and 2 can,t sna" out of it and /%"0 2 am so sad or unha""y that it is #ery "ainful. [1] [edit]4DI,I* #he @-5$5) !as a revision of the ori inal instrument, developed "y @eck durin the 1*C,s and copyri hted in 1*C+. #o improve ease of use, the "a and b statements" descri"ed a"ove !ere removed, and respondents !ere instructed to endorse ho! they had "een feelin durin the precedin t!o !eeks.[E][C] #he internal consistency for the @-5$5) !as ood, !ith a =ron"ach's alpha coefficient of around ,.+:, meanin that the items on the inventory are hi hly correlated !ith each other.[+] 7o!ever, this version retained some fla!s3 the @-5$5) only addressed six out of the nine -4<$ 555 criteria for depression. #his and other criticisms !ere addressed in the @-5$55. [edit]4DI,II #he @-5$55 !as a 1**E revision of the @-5,[C] developed in response to the )merican Psychiatric )ssociation's pu"lication of the -ia nostic and 4tatistical <anual of <ental -isorders, Fourth Ddition, !hich chan ed many of the dia nostic criteria for <ajor -epressive -isorder. 5tems involvin chan es in "ody ima e, hypochondria, and difficulty !orkin !ere replaced. )lso, sleep loss and appetite loss items !ere revised to assess "oth increases and decreases in sleep and appetite. )ll "ut three of the items !ere re!orded3 only the items dealin !ith feelin s of "ein punished, thou hts a"out suicide, and interest in sex remained the same. Finally, participants !ere asked to rate ho! they have "een feelin for the past t!o !eeks, as opposed to the past !eek as in the ori inal @-5. >ike the @-5, the @-5$55 also contains %1 &uestions, each ans!er "ein scored on a scale value of , to 6. #he cutoffs used differ from the ori inal2 ,G162 minimal depression3 19G1*2 mild depression3 %,G%+2 moderate depression3 and %*GE62 severe depression. 7i her total scores indicate more severe depressive symptoms. One measure of an instrument's usefulness is to see ho! closely it a rees !ith another similar instrument that has "een validated a ainst clinical intervie! "y a trained clinician. 5n this respect, the @-5$55 is positively correlated !ith the 7amilton -epression .atin 4cale !ith aPearson r of ,.C1, sho!in
[*]

ood a reement. #he test !as also sho!n to have a hi h one$!eek testGretest estin that it !as not overly sensitive to daily variations in mood.

relia"ility /Pearson r U,.*60, su [edit]T+o,"actor

#he test also has hi h internal consistency /VU.*10.[C]

a''roach to de'ression

-epression can "e thou ht of as havin t!o components2 the affective component /e. . mood0 and the