Background

Rorschach's Inkblot Test

Uploaded 5/12/2013, approx. 4 minute read

My name is Sam Vaknin, and I am the author of Malignant Self-Love, Narcissism Revisited.

Today we will discuss the Rorschach Ink Blots Test.

Swiss psychiatrist Hermann Rorschach developed a set of blots of ink, ink blots, to test subjects in his clinical research.

In a 1921 monograph published in English in 1942 and 1951 respectively, Rorschach postulated that the blots of ink evoked consistent and similar responses in groups of patients.

Only ten of the original ink blots are currently in diagnostic use.

It was John Exner who systematized the administration and scoring of the test, combining the best of several systems in use at the time, systems developed by Beck, Kloper, Rapaport and Singer.

The Rorschach Ink Blots are ambiguous forms, printed on 18 x 24 cm cards, in both black and white, and sometimes in color.

The very ambiguity of the ink blots provokes free associations in the test subject.

The diagnostician stimulates the formation of flights of fantasy and fancy by asking questions such as, what do you think this is? What might this be?

The diagnostician then proceeds to record verbatim the patient's responses as well as the ink blots' spatial position and orientation.

An example of such record would read, card V upside down, child sitting on a porch and crying, waiting for his mother to return.

Heading down through the entire deck, the examiner then proceeds to read aloud the responses while asking the patient to explain, in each and every case, why she or he chose to interpret the card the way they did. He asks, what in card V prompted you to think of an abandoned child?

In this case, the patient is allowed to add details and expand upon his or her original answer.

Again, everything is noted and the subject is asked to explain, what is the card, or in his previous response, gave birth to the added details.

So it's an iterative process, a process where the answer expands as the conversation continues and the card is merely a trigger.

Scoring the Rorschach test is a demanding task. Inevitably, due to its literary nature, there is no uniform automated scoring system.

Methodologically, the scorer notes four items for each card.

One, location, which parts of the inkblot were singled out or emphasized in the subject responses? Did the patient refer to the whole blot, to a detail in the inkblot? And if so, was it a common or an unusual detail? Did the patient refer at all to the white spaces between the blots?

The second item is determinant.

Does the blot resemble what the patient saw in it? Which parts of the blot correspond to the subject's visual and fantasy and narrative? Is it the blot's form, movement, color, texture, dimensionality, shading, or symmetrical pairing that might have provoked in the subject the responses that he gave, elicited them?

The third thing noted by the diagnostician is the content.

Which of Exner's 27 content categories was selected by the patient? A human figure, an animal detail, blood, fire, sex, x-ray, and so on?

Popularity.

The patient's responses are compared to the overall distribution of answers among people tested, hither to. Statistically, certain cards are linked to specific images and plots.

For example, card 1 often provokes associations of bats or butterflies. The sixth most popular response to card 4 is animal skin or human figure dressed in fur, and so on.

Then there is the issue of organizational activity.

How coherent and organized is the patient's narrative, and how well does he or she link the various images together?

There is form quality. How well does the patient's percept fit with a plot and with a blot?

There are four grades from superior through ordinary, and weak to minus.

Exner defined minus as the distorted, arbitrary, unrealistic use of form as related to the content offered, where an answer is imposed on the blot area with total or near total disregard for the structure of the area.

The interpretation of the test results of both the scores obtained and what we know about mental health disorders is somewhat questionable.

The test teaches the skill diagnostician how the subject processes information and what is the structure and content of his internal one. These provide meaningful insights into the patient's defenses, psychological defenses, reality tests, intelligence, fantasy life and psychosexual makeup. Or, so it is thought.

The Rorschach test is highly subjective and depends inordinately on the skills and training of the diagnostician and his interpretative abilities. It therefore cannot be used to reliably diagnose patients. It merely draws attention to the patient's defenses and personal style.

In the case of narcissists, that's not enough.

If you enjoyed this article, you might like the following:

PCL-R (Psychopathy Checklist Revised) Test

The Psychopathy Checklist Revised Test (PCLR) is a structured interview that is used to rate symptoms common among psychopaths in forensic populations. The test is designed to cover the major psychopathic traits and behaviors, but it has very dubious, predictive and retrodictive power. The PCLR is based on a structured interview and collateral data gathered from family, friends, and colleagues and from documents. The hope of the designers of the PCLR test is that information gathered outside the scope of a structured interview will serve to rectify any potential abuse, diagnostic bias, and manipulation by both the testee and the tester.


MMPI-2 Psychological Test: Controversial, but Hard to Fake

The MMPI-2 test booklet has 567 items, but a rough assessment can be made based on the first 370 queries. The items are arranged in scales, and the responses are compared to answers provided by control subjects. The nature of the deviation determines the patient's traits and tendencies, but not their diagnosis. The test results place the subject in a group of patients who reacted similarly, and the validity scales indicate whether the patient responded truthfully and accurately or was trying to manipulate the test. The clinical scales measure various mental health issues, and the interpretation of the MMPI-2 is now fully computerized.


Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI): Fortune Cookie or Reliable Test?

The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) is a widely used and contested personality assessment test with various versions and millions of users worldwide. It is based on Jungian theory and classifies individuals into one of 16 personality types. While some studies have found the MBTI to be valid and useful, others criticize its dichotomous nature, lack of reliability, and deviation from Jung's original theory. Despite these criticisms, the MBTI remains popular and can provide insight, raise self-awareness, and help individuals understand their past experiences and relationships.


Personality Types: Which Are YOU?

Type theory in psychology categorizes individuals based on personality characteristics, with historical roots tracing back to ancient Greek humoral theory and later developments by figures like Freud and Jung. Freud's libidinal types theory classifies personalities into erotic, obsessional, and narcissistic types based on the distribution of libido, while Jung's typology focuses on attitudinal and functional types, emphasizing introversion, extroversion, and the dominant functions of the psyche. Additionally, personality classifications such as type A, B, D, and T highlight various traits, with type A being competitive and ambitious, type B being easygoing, type D being distressed, and type T being thrill-seeking. Despite the appeal of categorizing personalities, the rigor and substantiation of these theories remain limited, reflecting a desire for control and understanding in a complex world.


Psychological Tests and Structured Interviews: Introduction

Personality assessment combines both art and science, with standardized psychological tests and structured interviews designed to minimize bias and ensure objectivity. These tests often limit responses to specific formats, such as true or false, and rely on automated scoring to reduce human involvement in data gathering. However, interpretation remains crucial, and practitioners typically use multiple tests to create a coherent picture of an individual's personality, ensuring that results align across different assessments. The distinction between objective and projective tests highlights the varying levels of structure and potential bias in scoring, with projective tests relying heavily on the clinician's judgment and interpretation.


Disorders of Eating and Personality (3rd International Conference on Neurology and Brain Disorders)

Eating disorders are complex and often comorbid with personality disorders, particularly borderline personality disorder. The key to improving the mental state of patients with both disorders is to focus on their eating and sleeping disorders first. By controlling their eating disorder, patients can reassert control over their lives, leading to better regulation of their sense of self-worth, enhanced self-confidence, and self-esteem. Treatment options include medication, cognitive or behavioral therapy, psychodynamic therapy, and family therapy. Recovery prognosis is good after two years of treatment and support.


How to Handle Complaints (CIAPS Lecture)

Complaints can be categorized into two types: those arising from unsatisfactory experiences and those stemming from unacceptable behavior. The psychology behind complaining often involves a gap between expectations and reality, leading to frustration and potential aggression. Effective complaint management requires acknowledging the complaint, validating the complainant's feelings, and implementing changes based on the feedback received. Complaints should be viewed as valuable insights that can drive improvement and innovation, rather than as negative experiences to be avoided or dismissed.


Drama Queens/Kings: Narcissists, Borderlines

Dramatic behavior is common in cluster B personality disorders, such as narcissistic, borderline, and antisocial personality disorders. Drama serves various psychological functions, including enhancing functionality, distancing oneself from trauma, regulating self-esteem, and manipulating others. It can also be a diversionary tactic or a form of emotional blackmail. While attention-seeking is often associated with dramatic behavior, it is not the primary motivation for most individuals with cluster B personality disorders.


Psychology of Swinging (The Lifestyle)

Swinging, also known as group sex or spouse-sharing, involves sexual acts performed by more than two participants. The psychological background to such pursuits is not clear, but thousands of online chats reveal ten psychodynamic strengths. These include latent and overt bisexuality and homosexuality, the Slut-Madona complex, voyeurism and exhibitionism, vicarious gratification, masochism, legitimized cheating, alleviating boredom, displaying partners, and objectification. Swinging can be a form of art, entertainment, and intimacy-enhancing recreation, but it can also provoke anxiety, romantic jealousy, and guilt.


Personality or Gut Disorders? Microbiome and Mental Illness

The gut microbiome plays a crucial role in mental health, influencing not only brain function but also personality and temperament through a bidirectional relationship. This relationship suggests that gut bacteria can affect emotional states and behaviors, while psychological conditions can alter gut microbiota composition. Research indicates that disturbances in gut bacteria are linked to various psychiatric disorders, including borderline personality disorder, and that early life factors, such as maternal gut health, can impact the development of these conditions. The interconnectedness of bodily systems challenges traditional views of mental health, emphasizing the need for a holistic approach to treatment that considers the gut-brain axis. Overall, the findings highlight the importance of gut health in understanding and potentially treating mental health issues.

Transcripts Copyright © Sam Vaknin 2010-2024, under license to William DeGraaf
Website Copyright © William DeGraaf 2022-2024
Get it on Google Play
Privacy policy