Do psychiatrists still use his inkblot tests? I keep seeing them on tv shows, so it must be true (wink, wink).
But seriously folks, the patient’s interpretation of these blots response is itself open to interpretation. Why isn’t a lunatic interpretation of a black stain just chalked up to one’s degree of imagination- or lack thereof? And who’s to say that the designer of said blots wasn’t drawing on his own imagination at the time?
Has anybody here ever been subjected to one? Did you “pass”?
I’ve never seen the test, but a friend took it during a psychological evaluation he underwent during a custody battle. He observed that the bisymmetry of the inkblots is something he’d most often noted in nature, particularly in living things such as humans and animals.
What a coincidence! A good friend of mine is working on her Psy.D. (Psychology Doctorate) and we were discussing this on the phone not an hour ago. She was complaining about how stressed she was from studying Rorschach tests or however it’s spelled. I expressed surprise that they haven’t been debunked, like pretty much every other psychological test, and she told me that they are probably the most respected psychological tests one can give. There is little to no cultural bias involved (my friend is Chinese-American and is very concerned about cultural bias) and there is a very scientific system used in profiling people based on their responses to the tests. I don’t really get it all (it seems very complicated), but if you like, I could give her your email address, and she might (or might not) email you and explain how it works.
Yeah, they still use them and they seem to work pretty well. Apparently (learned this from a psych. grad student ex) for some reason psychotics don’t see in them a whole and bisymetrical design, but will focus instead on particular small sections of them-- like one tiny little appendage. Instead of “uh…a butterfly?” they think “oh, this little thing over here in this corner looks like a penis or something.” (My very layman’s memory of the perhaps completely delusional understanding I had of the explanation I was given, anyway.)
My own feeling is that the test is fatally flawed in its attempt to standardize subjective interpretations of amorphous shapes that the experimenter cannot define with any reliability. But, it is a tool, flawed though it may be, that has a legion of adherents who, just as with the polygraph examiners of the world, have gained some familiarity with their tool and have a definite economic incentive to promote it as a standard. Not unlike the promoters of the various “offender profiles” we’ve seen over the years.
The bilateral symmetry is, of course, no accident. My friend’s observation, noted above, is, I think, largely on target. Bilateral symmetry is most evocative of animals and humans, and the Rorschach blots (there are only ten recognized) are meant to stir thoughts of human shapes engaged in…what? Frankly, I look at a lot of maps; the black and white images tend to make me think of maps. When I posted earlier, I had not seen the actual Rorschach blots; now, a few hours later, I have.
I have never seen any evidence (studies) that indicate that they “seem to work pretty well” or at all.
The tests are definately still given. I wouldn’t call them one of “the most respected” tests. Considering many psychologists I know HATE HATE them. But, many still use them, and find them a source of good information. Most people skeptical of them, mostly, just don’t really understand the relevence. And Psychologists are really secretive regarding testing, so they don’t skew the tests. (To protect the validity of the tests)
I can tell you the theory behind it is based on Freudian theory, so most people who tend to use it are Fruedian psychologists. The Fruedian concept mostly at work here is… (suddenly I can’t remember… Transferance I believe).
I can also tell you that tests now are a lot better and less subjective than they used to be. There is a great deal of research, and “scientific” research to validate the tests and make results valid. (As there are with all tests, I don’t remember who said that all psych. tests have been dubunked… but thats just not true.) If you happened to be a mapmaker, and saw a lot of stuff regarding maps, it would be normal. M.K. is right, there is special things that "disturbed " people do that are pointed out by Rorschach tests. One of them, as he pointed out, being that they will focus on tiny sections of the test. Other wierd stuff like that… Even then, there are generally other things in order for anything unusual to be reported. I can’t tell you what, I’m certainly no Psychologist… (though I have worked with many)…
In my opinion (with my moderate training) they’re certainly interesting. Helpful to a psychologist in many ways… though I certainly wouldn’t hang my hat on anything it told me.
Since it is 3 AM and I see ink blots without paper I think I’ll toss in my WAG and say it might be easier for people to look at some marks on paper and say what they are than say what is bothering them. And they would talk about what was on their minds anyway.
Isn’t it nice to have psych buddies who come around to test us and explain what some of this good stuff is all about? I’d say I’ve had just about everything done but foot printing but a foot-doctor-to-be used to come around every once in a while to do everyone’s feet for practice. It wasn’t bad, either.