# Rorschach Test - Science or Pseudo-science?

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rorschach-test-science-or-pseudo-science/114281>\
**Category:** Factual Questions\
**Created:** [June 16, 2002, 12:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rorschach-test-science-or-pseudo-science/114281 "2002-06-16T00:39:26Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 7

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\
**Post date:** [June 16, 2002, 6:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rorschach-test-science-or-pseudo-science/114281/7 "2002-06-16T06:08:49Z")

</div>

**Achernar** : Um, I believe you’re thinking about the [coefficient of determination (R2)](http://www2.chass.ncsu.edu/garson/pa765/correl.htm) which is the _square_ of the correlation coefficient.

In your example a correlation coefficient of .33 implies that one variable can explain about 11% of the variance.

.33^2=.11  
Not sqrt(.33) (=.57)

FWIW, .33 might indicate a moderate effect, except that I’m not sure what variables are being studied here.

---

_[View the full topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rorschach-test-science-or-pseudo-science/114281)._