Evidence to Correct Misperceptions About Rorschach Norms

Abstract

Possible factors affecting normative shifts in Rorschach data are considered, including (a) genuine changes in mental health over time, (b) alterations in the type of target sample under consideration, (c) evolving scoring rules, and (d) variations in test administration skills or context. I show that the Comprehensive System (CS) criteria for coding form quality have changed substantially over time. Building on the extensive research of others, I also show that CS data collected around the world from people tested outside of a clinical context look somewhat less healthy than Exner's reference sample of socially/vocationally functioning nonpatients but somewhat more healthy than Exner's reference sample of people starting outpatient psychotherapy. Furthermore, preliminary results from Exner's new non-patient sample recruited using the same procedures as before reveals scores that are generally quite similar to the existing reference values. The assertion that CS norms overpathologize people is not supported.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 53 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.