In the previous Special Section, the authors presented empirical evidence and logical analysis that were sufficient to demonstrate that the widespread use of the Rorschach in clinical, legal, forensic, and occupational settings is unwarranted on both scientific and ethical grounds (J. Hunsley & J. M. Bailey, 1999). To expand on their analysis and to respond to issues raised in the previous and current Special Sections, they begin their article by examining a number of conceptual issues that are at the heart of the disagreements about the Rorschach. The focus is then shifted to the central issue of clinical utility, with an emphasis on why current research is insufficient to demonstrate the utility of the Rorschach. Next, the psychometric issues raised by Weiner (2001) are addressed and an alternative perspective on the psychometric viability of the Rorschach is provided. Finally, the authors conclude with some suggestions for future directions that must be taken in research to address the substantive concerns raised by Rorschach critics.
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 45 citations exist upstream.
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.