The Rorschach inkblot test is one of the most widely known psychological projective test of personality, and the most controversial. In general, projective tests are psychoanalytically based tools that assist clients to reveal their unconscious conflicts via responses towards ambiguous stimuli, and can also help psychologists to determine psychological disorders. Specifically, the Rorschach allows individuals to interpret a series of abstract inkblots based on their emotional and cognitive function, as well as interaction (Barlow & Durand, 2009).
Apparently it was Leonardo da Vinci the first who realized a possible similarity between inkblot responses and personality, as he had his students draw paintings while looking at ambiguous visual forms, and surprisingly each painter revealed personal traits in his figures. Next, Justinius Kerner's in 1857 claimed that some people make idiosyncratic or revealing interpretations and used inkblots as projective surfaces, and later on in 1896 Alfred Binet who proposed the idea of using inkblots to asses personality functioning and other investigators supported his proposition, and so Whipple published the first standardized inkblot set in 1910. Wayne Holtzman designed a similar inkblot test to correct the limitations of the Rorschach, and his technique includes 45 inkblots and demonstrates moderate inter-scorer reliability and predictive validity (Kaplan, & Saccuzzo, 2008).
The Rorschach test was introduced by the Swiss Freudian psychiatrist and psychoanalyst Hermann Rorschach, on whom the test is named after. Hermann was the first to use inkblot stimuli and responses as a diagnostic instrument, which was published in 1921 in his book “Psychodiagnostik.” Rorschach’s original study consi...
... middle of paper ...
...me of a kaleidoscope, a tube of mirrors containing loose, colored objects and bits of glass that when light enters creates a colorful pattern that could resemble the test’s inkblots.
Finally, it’s up to each psychologist and his opinion whether to use it or not during a clinical diagnosis, but as most research supports one should not depend on it for reaching conclusions as it’s not a valid and reliable mean. Also whoever decides to use it should be responsible for administrating it in the most effective way, without being biased or guiding responses since nothing can be perceived as right or wrong. Clients should be notified that they can say whatever comes into their mind without fear of being judged, and psychologists should accept the fact that some responses can be meaningful and correlated with their diagnosis, and other information can be in-comprehensive.
A general checklist is included for clients to initially use and then cross cutting measures are used to provide information about specific client symptoms. The cross cutting measures allow the clinician to have data that can be used for diagnosis. These checklists are disorder specific and include severity levels that can be used in treatment planning and safety check lists. These can also be administered at intervals to track client progress over time. These can be used as part of an Evidence Based Practice model and can provide statistical data on clinician effectiveness (American Psychological Association, 2013).
Haney, Craig; Zimbardo, Philip. American Psychologist, Jul98, Vol. 53 Issue 7, p709, 19p, 2 Black and White Photographs,
Butcher, James N. "Assessment in Clinical Psychology: A Perspective on the Past, Present Challenges, and Future Prospects." Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice 13(3)(2006): 205-209.
Bibliography 3rd edition Psychology (Bernstein-Stewart, Roy, Srull, & Wickens) Houghton Mifflin Company Boston, Massachusetts 1994
...ression; yet it is still extremely important to keep in mind, especially in an educational setting, that results from the BDI-II or any other symptom inventory or mental health test should be thoroughly researched and used in correlation with other assessments and client specific data when making a diagnosis.
Hergenhahn, B. R. (2009). An introduction to the history of psychology (6th ed., p. 224,
Liddle, H A., Rowe, C L., Dakof, G A., Henderson, C E., Greenbaum, P E.; (Feb, 2009). Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology; Vol 77(1); 12-25. Doi: 10.1177/0306624X10366960
Mcbride, Carolina. Zuroff, David. Ravitz, Paula. Koestner, Richard. Moskowitz, Debbie. Quilty, Lena. Bagby, Michael. (2010). British Journal of Clinical Psychology. , 49(4), p529-545.
It is amazing to look back and realize that this experiment was done to determine how the Nazis could all have so much hate towards the Jewish people. The lack of compassion towards humans shown by the Nazi Germans during the holocaust inspired Milgram to conduct this experiment. He was curious on how any sane human being could want to participate in genocide of an entire group of people. It’s incredible to know that something like the Nazi war could bring about such valuable information to psychology. For years Milgram’s theory has been one of the primary points of social psychology. Because of the results revealed after Milgram’s creative design, psychologists use this information today to describe certain behaviors in people. I believe it is fair to say that Stanley Milgram has had one of the largest impacts in the history of social psychology.
In 1963s, Stanley Milgram, a Yale professor, conducted an experiment that sparked intense controversy throughout the nation(Milgram 77). Milgram attempted to pinpoint evil in its rawest form: through ordinary people. This was achieved by placing an ordinary person, called the teacher, in a situation in which an instructor pressured the subject, called the teacher, to shock another person, called the learner(Milgram 78). Despite hearing the progressively agonizing screams of the learner, the teacher continued to comply with the directives given by the instructor, thereby selecting obedience over morality(Milgram 80). While this experiment was revered and praised by many scientists and psychologists,
The Milgram experiment is probably one of the most well known experiments in Psychology. The reason being is because its participants were not told what was really occurring in the experiment. After the experiment was over, the participants were mentally and emotionally affected. Later, a cognitive psychologist, George Miller described Milgram’s experiments, together with Zimbardo’s Prison Experiment, as “being ideal for public consumption of psychological research” (Blass, 2002). And indeed, Milgram’s studies, as Zimbardo’s, are clearly meant to be spread to a broad audience, the moral and preventative objectives permeating the experiments from their very outset (Stavrakis, 2007).. In this paper, I will explore how experiments such as Milgram and Zimbardo’s, as well as the Tuskeegee Syphilis Experiment, changed the way experiments are conducted today because of the formation of the Institutional Review Board (IRB).
While taking this test and reading about the information that was provided I was not really surprised about what information was given about my personality. I am 95% of what this test says I am. This exercise helps very little because I arty new 95% of the information is going to give me, it is a good tool to give you that support he would need if you are doubting yourself.
Kendell, R. and Jablensky, A. (2003), Distinguishing between the validity and utility of psychiatric diagnoses, American Journal of Psychiatry, Vol. 160, No. 1, pp. 4-12.
For psychologists, one of the more popular theories espoused is the trait approach to personality, or “the idea that people have consistent personality characteristics that can be measured and studied” (Kalat, 2002, 512). However there are several problems that arise. First, there are significant cross-cultural differences, so one set of personality traits for one culture may differ considerably for another. The next problem would concern the creation of a test that could accurately measure these traits. While psychologists have for the most part addressed these issues, I will focus on the latter of the two. There has been a number of multiple personality tests put to use such as the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI), the Thematic Apperception Test (TAT), the Rorschach Inkblots and others. In our class we were instructed to take the 16 PF personality test in which we would judge for ourselves how accurate the test was based on our own personal experiences. In judging the usefulness of this test we took into consideration its reliability and validity. For a test to be reliable it must be able to accurately reflect consistent results for various people that can be agreed upon by researchers and therapists alike. Reliability in turn relates to validity. To be valid a test must be dependable producing data that can be used to detect a mental illness or otherwise certain personality dimensions within psychologically healthy individuals. Furthermore personality tests must be standardized, having data capable of being “interpreted in a prescribed fashion” (Kalat, 2002, 528). These standards are based on a comparison of a large number of people who have taken the test, one group with a particular disorder and another group who consist of the normal range. These allow researchers to identify people who score within a certain range to be more typical of a particular disorder. While the 16 PF personality test meets these criteria, whether or not the test is accurate remains to be explored. Within the next couple of pages I will describe the results of the test and discuss whether or not the data is an accurate reflection of my own personality.
Assessment is used as a basis of identifying problems, planning interventions, evaluating and diagnosing clients. Assessment involves identifying statements; actions and procedures to help individuals, groups, couples and families make progress in the counseling environment. Although counselors have the opportunity to limit their scope of practice with respect to modalities, theories, and types of clients, a counselor cannot function without an understanding of the processes and procedures of assessment in counseling. Formal and informal help counselors more accurately assess client issues, create case conceptualizations and select effective empirically proven therapies. The focus of assessments is on gathering information. Thus testing is a way in which counselors construct a measure of psychology through instruments or specified procedures to obtain valid and reliable methods in assessing a client. Counselor uses established scientific procedures, relevant standards and current professional knowledge