Rorschach Scores in Applied Clinical Practice: A Survey of Perceived Validity by Experienced Clinicians

Gregory J. Meyer · Wei-Cheng Hsiao · Donald J. Viglione · Joni L. Mihura · Leah M. Abraham

37 citations0/0 files storedJournal of Personality Assessment

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Psychological Testing and Assessment Psychometric Methodologies and Testing Reliability and Agreement in Measurement

Abstract

We surveyed practicing clinicians who regularly used the Rorschach about the perceived clinical validity of specific Rorschach scores from many coding systems. The survey included quantitative feedback on the validity of specific variables as well as qualitative input in several areas, including the validity of specific variables, the potentially unique information that can be obtained from them, coding challenges associated with Comprehensive System (CS) codes, and recommendations for CS developments. Participants were recruited by applying a snowball sampling strategy. Based on responses from 246 experienced clinicians from 26 countries, composite judgments on rated variables were quite reliable (e.g., M α = .95 across 88 CS variables), despite limited agreement among any 2 judges. The aggregated judgments clearly differentiated among scores that were considered more and less clinically valid and the overall results aligned with recently obtained meta-analytic conclusions from the traditional validity literature (Mihura, Meyer, Dumitrascu, & Bombel, 2012). The judges also provided guidance concerning revisions and enhancements that would facilitate Rorschach-based assessment in the future. We discuss the implication of the quantitative and qualitative findings and provide suggestions for future directions based on the results.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

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

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 37 citations exist upstream.

References

1989MMPI-2 : Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 : manual for administration and scoring 1961The Q-sort method in personality assessment and psychiatric research.2010Rorschach Comprehensive System 2001Using the five-factor model to represent the DSM-IV personality disorders: An expert consensus approach.2000Psychological test usage: Implications in professional psychology.2006A Survey of Psychological Test Use Patterns Among Forensic Psychologists 1999Revising and Assessing Axis II, Part I: Developing a Clinically and Empirically Valid Assessment Method 1999Revising and Assessing Axis II, Part II: Toward an Empirically Based and Clinically Useful Classification of Personality Disorders

Cited by

2012Developing Continuous Variable Composites for Rorschach Measures of Thought Problems, Vigilance, and Suicide Risk 2019Does the Rorschach Performance Assessment System (R-PAS) Differ from the Comprehensive System (CS) on Variables Relevant to Interpretation?2012Expert Testimony Using the Rorschach Performance Assessment System in Psychological Injury Cases 2020Rorschach Performance Assessment System (R-PAS) Interrater Reliability in a Brazilian Adolescent Sample and Comparisons With Three Other Studies

Explore the map →

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

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.