Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to submit your manuscript to SPPS

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Assessment
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Wood, J. M.
Right arrow Articles by West, S. G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Wood, J. M.
Right arrow Articles by West, S. G.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Methodological Issues in Evaluating Rorschach Validity: A Comment on Burns and Viglion (1996), Weiner (1996), and Ganellen (1996)

James M. Wood

University of Texas at El Paso

M. Teresa Nezworski

University of Texas at Dallas

William J. Stejskal

Woodbridge Psychological Associates, Falls Church, Virginia

Sena Garven

University of Texas at El Paso

Stephen G. West

Arizona State University

The old controversy regarding the Rorschach Inkblot Test has recently revived. The present article suggests that the debate will be most productive if careful attention is paid to methodological issues. Three recent examples illustrate how incorrect conclusions regarding Rorschach validity may occur if methodological issues are not evaluated carefully. The present article examines (a) Burns and Viglione's (1996) conclusion that the Rorschach Human Experience Variable (HEV) is a predictor of interpersonal relatedness among adults; (b) Weiner's (1996) conclusion that the D score and Morbid Responses (MOR) are valid measures of "experienced distress" in Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD); and (c) Ganellen's (1996a, 1996b) conclusion that the Rorschach Depression Index (DEPI) and the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) are comparable in their power to identify diagnoses of depression.

Key Words: Rorschach Inkblot Test • Comprehensive System for the Rorschach • methodology • validity • posttraumatic stress disorder • depression

Assessment, Vol. 6, No. 2, 115-129 (1999)
DOI: 10.1177/107319119900600202
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 AssessmentHome page
J. B. Ritsher, E. B. Slivko-Kolchik, and I. V. Oleichik
Assessing Depression in Russian Psychiatric Patients: Validity of MMPI and Rorschach
Assessment, December 1, 2001; 8(4): 373 - 389.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 AssessmentHome page
K. Jorgensen, T. J. Andersen, and H. Dam
The Diagnostic Efficiency of the Rorschach Depression Index and the Schizophrenia Index: A Review
Assessment, September 1, 2000; 7(3): 259 - 280.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 AssessmentHome page
J. M. Wood and S. O. Lilienfeld
The Rorschach Inkblot Test: A Case of Overstatement?
Assessment, December 1, 1999; 6(4): 341 - 351.
[Abstract] [PDF]