John Exner and the book that started it all: a review of The Rorschach Systems

This article is a review and a reassessment of Exner's (1969) The Rorschach Systems. The book reviews the history of the development of the Rorschach, primarily in the United States, including a detailed analysis of the progressive development of systems devised by Klopfer, Beck, Piotrowski, Hertz, Rapaport, and Schafer. The final versions of each system are compared with each other, and with Rorschach's own system. The development of the book is linked to Exner' s personal relationship with Klopfer, Beck, and Hertz. The book is described as the basic forerunner of Exner's Comprehensive System.     

John Exner and the Book That Started It All: A Review of The Rorschach Systems

This article is a review and a reassessment of Exner's (1969) The Rorschach Systems. The book reviews the history of the development of the Rorschach, primarily in the United States, including a detailed analysis of the progressive development of systems devised by Klopfer, Beck, Piotrowski, Hertz, Rapaport, and Schafer. The final versions of each system are compared with each other, and with Rorschach's own system. The development of the book is linked to Exner' s personal relationship with Klopfer, Beck, and Hertz. The book is described as the basic forerunner of Exner's Comprehensive System.     

Concepts of Development and the Rorschach: The Contributions of Paul Lerner and John Exner in Historical Context

The Rorschach Test has been approached from 3 fundamentally different developmental perspectives: those growing out of the empiricist tradition, psychoanalysis, and the developmental psychologies of Piaget and Werner. In this article, I highlight the distinctive characteristics of each perspective, explore how they have shaped approaches to Rorschach theory and practice, and examine the contributions of Paul Lerner and John Exner in this context.     

Rorschach administration: a comparison of the effect of two instructions

The effect of administering the Rorschach Inkblot Method under 2 instructional sets was compared across 19 outcome measures. Sixty healthy participants randomly received either the short instruction "What might this be?" originally developed by Rorschach (1942) and recommended in the Comprehensive System (Exner, 1993), or a long instruction (Killingmo, 1980), which for many years has been the standard instruction in Norway. The short instruction produced significantly more questions to the examiner about the test and more brief protocols R < 14) than did the long one. However, for the traditional summary Rorschach scores no between-group differences were observed for the 2 instructional sets. It is suggested that if future studies of larger clinical and more representative samples demonstrate corresponding results, a more elaborate standard instruction might be preferable.     

A comparison of Rorschach developmental level and form-level systems as indicators of psychosis.

Psychotic and nonpsychotic psychiatric inpatients were tested on the Rorschach. "Reality-testing" was measured by four form-level scoring systems designed by Beck, Mayman, Becker, and Wilensky. The psychotic subjects were dichotomized on three diagnostic dimensions: schizophrenia, paranoia, and premorbid social adjustment. No significant differences were found for the Beck system. With the other systems, psychotics showed significantly poorer reality testing than nonpsychotics. No differences were found for the schizophrenic and paranoid dimensions. The Phillips premorbid adjustment score was negatively correlated with all four measures of "reality-testing." The conclusion drawn was that Rorschach measures of "reality testing" are associated with psychotic and poor premorbid functioning, but do not differentiate schizophrenic from nonschizophrenic psychotics or paranoid schizophrenics from nonparanoid schizophrenics.     

Construct validation of scales derived from the Rorschach method: a review of issues and introduction to the Rorschach rating scale

I suggest the main goal of Rorschach validation should be a refined understanding of what each score means. Toward this end, I review general issues in construct validity, hurdles unique to the Rorschach, and general limitations with validation criteria. I then recommend two approaches for improving criteria so they can begin approximating the gold standards that are necessary for a refined understanding of what scores actually measure. The first is a method for improving expert clinical judgment, and the second is a method for aggregating data across diverse judges. Finally, the Rorschach Rating Scale (RRS) is presented as a criterion tool to be used with either of these approaches to validation. The RRS is a fairly comprehensive summary of the constructs thought to be measured by various Rorschach scoring systems. The utility of the RRS for research and training are discussed, as are other practical, theoretical, and psychometric issues in its application.     

Scoring the Rorschach: a constructive critique of Exner's Comprehensive Rorschach System

John Exner's rationale for scoring the Rorschach and his decision to score "blend" responses by assigning equal weights are critically reviewed. The resultant exclusion of new responses made during the Inquiry of the Free Association responses is viewed as a major deficiency in the Comprehensive Rorschach System. A change to Klopfer's "Main-Additional" scoring method is recommended as a corrective.     

A psychometric comparison of the Beck Depression Inventory-II in English and Spanish

The Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II; A. T. Beck, R. A. Steer, & G. K. Brown, 1996) is a widely used measure of depressive symptomatology originally authored in English and then translated to Spanish. However, there are very limited data available on the Spanish translation. This study compared the psychometric characteristics of the BDI-II in Spanish and English in a sample of 895 college students. The instrument was administered twice with a 1-week interval, either in the same language on both occasions or in a different language on each occasion. Results show strong internal consistency and good test-retest reliability in both languages. Confirmatory factor analysis demonstrated that the published English-language factor structure showed good fit with data from the Spanish instrument. Among bilingual participants who took the BDI-II in both languages, there was no significant language effect. These data provide initial evidence of comparable reliability and validity between the English and Spanish BDI-II in a nonclinical sample.     

Bruno Klopfer: a Rorschach pioneer

Bruno Klopfer is perhaps best known for his pioneering work on the Rorschach Inkblot Test. His efforts in developing and popularizing projective techniques were to have a profound impact on the development of psychological personality testing. In fact, prior to the introduction of Exner's comprehensive Rorschach scoring system, the Klopfer scoring system was the most popular among practicing clinicians (Exner & Exner, 1972, p. 13). Professionals in clinical psychology and psychiatry are certainly very indebted to Bruno Klopfer.