Test of Rorschach

The test of Rorschach or psychodiagnostik , described by the psychiatrist and Psychoanalyst Hermann Rorschach in 1921, is at the base of the projective Psychologie. It consists of a series of symmetrical spots which are proposed with the free interpretation of the subject whose answers will provide matter to the study of its personality. According to Nina Rausch de Traubenberg “the projective methods are a place where the theory is incarnated in a speech. ”

The boards are 10, seven are known as black while three are known as of color . However, in the black boards, one counts two boards using the red. All the boards comprise nuances, clear gray with the black, bright color with the color pastel.

The result in the form of figures compared with an average is called the psychogram , and synthetically provides the information collected during the test and of its quotation.

The test of Rorschach is regarded as pseudo-scientist by the skeptics, various having work shown that the conclusions of the psychotherapists using this test generally raised of the cold Lecture.

The use of the test of Rorschach in clinic psychology

The test of Rorschach, by its nature even, called at the same time with the sensoriality of the subject, and at the same time upon its unconscious (through the free interpretation of the spots).

The speech of the subject, its interpretations, is thus analyzed by the clinician in order to release from the relevant elements as for the evaluation of the psychism of the subject: psychopathological structure (Neurosis, Psychosis, absolute limit), mechanisms of defense privileged, recurrent themes,…

Rorschach is thus generally used as tool diagnosis with the TAT (Thematic Apperception Test) in a step entitled psychological Examen which is concluded by a report/ratio from analyzes with conclusion. The psychological examination is used for the diagnosis, with the indication of a treatment: psychoanalytical Psychotherapy to support in particular, or the work of expertises (justice, insurances, etc). Examined context must be duly informed and of it for what the examination will be used. To use the projective methods in contexts vague or to satisfy the curiosity of one or others is not deontologic!

The making of the test

The Psychologue clinician presents to the subject the ten boards of the test, to the place and in a given order (initially, black, then 2 two-tone (red/black), 4 black and finally the 3 polychrome ones). The divergent opinion with regard to the instruction to be passed on the subject: the range will say from “nothing”, with a more detailed instruction to reassure the patient. The patient can apprehend the material as it wishes it: to turn over the boards, to look them in the transparency…

The subject must thus say what he sees in the spots, without any restriction. The clinician scrupulously notes the dires subject, as well those which relate to the spots themselves as the dires strokes about it, which constitute a free association starting from the material presented.

The investigation

Once interpreted all the spots, the clinician represents the boards one by one, in order to determine the precise places where the subject saw the forms which he announced during making. The localizations are indeed very important for the quotation of the protocol.

It is in general at the time of the investigation that the subject is slackened, bringing additional material then, often embroidering on its own interpretations.

The quotation of the protocol

One calls protocol the whole of interpretations of the subject, analyzed by the clinician. This one has, starting from the elements of the investigation, the responsibility of note compared to each interpretation its localization, the content of interpretation (a cat in board VII for example), the reversals, the time spent on each board. One notes also the latency times between the presentation of the board and the first answer, which makes it possible to detect the emotional shocks possibly induced by the spot.
Quotation is carried out apart from the presence of the subject, once the finished test.

All the elements are important.

localizations of the answers: forms can be seen in details of the boards, or the whole of the board can be interpreted by the subject. There exist statistics on the use of the localizations, which represents the average of makings: a predilection for the small details, or the original details, that few people see, will lend itself to the analysis because not corresponding to the average.

One calls mode of apprehension the result of the average of the localizations. A mode of apprehension in details can suggest a obsessional Isolation of the type or a parcelling out psychotic.

determinants: it is what determined the answer of the subject. The determinants used are the form, the color, estompement (the nuances which can make think of clouds or waves for example), and kinestheses. Term of kinesthesis recovers answers where subject has seen movement, which can be underlain by a form (“here I see a catch who dance”), or vaguely perceived and in an abstract way (“that whirls”). One distinguishes human kinestheses (where the movement belongs to a human subject or parahumain) and minor kinestheses (animal or abstract).

The quotient of the determinants is important for the establishment of the psychogram: the privileged use of certain determinants can provide certain information. Thus, the determinants of color, are traditionally associated with the Pulsion.

One distinguishes the determinants according to their relevance: a form or a color can be with dimensions about according to whether it is based or not on reality (" here, I see a spider because it is bleu" , in board X).

contents: the spots of the boards are the subject of a certain consensus about their capacity to call upon unconscious contents. Thus, board IV is known as phallic board : its conformation calls upon the problems of the Phallus and castration, with the image of the father. The board V calls upon the image of oneself and the image of the body. One thus notes the contents brought by the subject, his answers, and one puts them in relation to the material itself: an complete absence of answers to the board V suggests difficulties identificatoires, even problems psychotic.

One tries to also locate the recurring contents, and one dimensions certain particular contents calling upon the anatomy, blood, the sex.

One also notes the number of banalities : to certain boards correspond of the answers very often seen by the subjects (for example: bat with the board V). The absence of banalities is to be considered.

One notes finally various times, latency time and total time, average time of answer, as well as the number of answers. A long latency time can indicate a shock : the subject reacts to the spot by a sideration, a stop of the process of thought, due to the emergence of intense instinctual impulses. A restricted number of answers can suggest a deceleration of the thought, a blocking of the fantasmatic capacity , an intense defense. A very high number of answers suggests an escape of the ideas, a failure of the Secondary process,…

The elements with dimensions are to be considered in interaction, none is not only analyzed nor is not enough to carry a diagnosis.

The psychogram

One notes on the sheet of psychogram the various figures for the modes of apprehension, the determinants and the contents. One carries out also their weighted average and one indicates their percentage compared to the total of the answers.
On the psychogram can also appear:

the intimate type of resonance (report/ratio of the determinants color and kinesthesis),
the index of anguish, obtained by making the average on hundred of the contents blood, anatomy, sex and human detail (arm, leg, nose… considering only).

Discusses around the psychometric validity of the test

In spite of almost 70 years of attempts, and many versions of the protocol of interpretation of the test of Rorschach, it appears very clearly that neither the validity, nor the coherence of measurements of the test were proven by psychometric procedures accepted by certain authors of which (Wood et al., 1999,2000; Eysenck, 1959).

Only one attempt was crowned with a modest success in the years 1970, by Holley (1973) and on a purely exploratory basis only, thanks to a study using an analysis of the type Q (which is focused on the coherence of the cases, rather than on that of the questions).

Rorschach is deceased even not 4 years after the first test, he had prevented well that these tests were not completely reliable and that it was still necessary to work above. The test of Rorschach however continues to cause interminable polemics, some, such Paul Kline (1983, 2000), seeing a single means there to collect rich and various information which calls upon the subjectivity of the clinician, the others seeing only one effective means there of breaking the ice during a clinical test, for lack of proven validity (some going even until answering Kline which astrology or the cartomancy answers the same criteria as the test of Rorschach under this angle).

Several intrinsic problems with the test were found during the years, in particular the variance of the other scores of the tests which was largely dependant on the value of the R (in other words the number of answers to a board), the problem being that the more the subject gives answers, the more it has chances that one of its answers is categorized in one of the " large lots" diagnoses of the test - for example a category psychotic (Holtzmann et al., 1961).

Certain protocols standardized particular Understanding the system or CS (Exner, 1974) also showed a strong variance of the results according to the culture of the examined population. Thus, at least two studies showed that populations such as the Indians of Alaska or the urban blacks of Americas presented characteristics very deviating of the standard of the protocol (Krall et al., 1983; Knell et al., 1996).

Other share, the standard CS was criticized like step sufficiently discriminating, thus diagnosing a number unusually significant of pathological cases (Lilienfeld et al., 2000; Shaffer et al., 1999)

See too

Thematic Apperception Test

External bonds

French company of Psychology (SFP): * Company of Rorschach and the projective methods;
Test of Rorschach - Site with the ten boards of the test of Rorschach.
eRorschach, supplementary programme to quotation
Analyze criticizes test of Rorschach
Histoire of the test and bonds
- French Site with the ten boards of the test of Rorschach.
the Québécois Company of the Projective Methods

Random links: