An examination of interrater reliability for scoring the Rorschach Comprehensive System in eight data sets

In this article, we describe interrater reliability for the Comprehensive System (CS; Exner. 1993) in 8 relatively large samples, including (a) students, (b) experienced re- searchers, (c) clinicians, (d) clinicians and then researchers, (e) a composite clinical sample (i.e., a to d), and 3 samples in which randomly generated erroneous scores were substituted for (f) 10%, (g) 20%, or (h) 30% of the original responses. Across samples, 133 to 143 statistically stable CS scores had excellent reliability, with median intraclass correlations of.85, .96, .97, .95, .93, .95, .89, and .82, respectively. We also demonstrate reliability findings from this study closely match the results derived from a synthesis of prior research, CS summary scores are more reliable than scores assigned to individual responses, small samples are more likely to generate unstable and lower reliability estimates, and Meyer's (1997a) procedures for estimating response segment reliability were accurate. The CS can be scored reliably, but because scoring is the result of coder skills clinicians must conscientiously monitor their accuracy.     

Relationships between Rorschach variables as relevant to the interpretation of structural data

The protocols of 100 adult nonpatients who had been administered the Rorschach twice in a long term temporal consistency study were used in this study. Separate intercorrelational matrices were calculated for each testing with R partialed. Means of the pairs of partial correlations were calculated, the square root of which is considered the best available estimate of the correlation between each pair of variables. Fifteen of the 120 partial correlations are considered to be significant. The findings are discussed in terms of their potential relevance for configurational interpretation of structural data.     

The Barnum effect in a computerized Rorschach interpretation system

Twelve psychiatric outpatients were administered the Rorschach test, and results were interpreted using the Exner (1983, 1986) Report for the Comprehensive System computer-based test interpretation (CBTI) program. Four psychiatrists made accuracy ratings for both real and bogus reports for each of their patients. Data were analyzed using two-way analyses of covariance (ANCOVAs), where report type was a repeated main effect, psychiatrist was a random main effect, and the number of statements in the report was the covariate. Results indicated that this CBTI provided only 5% discriminating power for any one patient, with 60% of the interpretive statements merely describing typical characteristics of the outpatient population. No significant psychiatrist, interaction, or covariate effects were encountered.     

A relational interpretation of the Rorschach color determinants

This article presents a contemporary relational interpretation of the Rorschach that is consistent with the empirical features of the Comprehensive System. The specific focus is on color determinants and the FC:CF+C ratio. The approach follows that of Schachtel ( 1959), who argued that how one perceives others reveals the quality of relatedness between oneself and others. Schachtel identified a developmental sequence of relatedness (perceptual-relatedness modes) and linked these levels of perceiving and relating to the Rorschach color determinants. I suggest that this developmental sequence, elaborated in a contemporary context, defines the expected or normative course of relatedness, whether across a lifetime, a particular relationship, or an interpersonal encounter. I further propose that relationships emerge and develop through organized trial-and-error activity, in the sense of Piaget's (1952) trying out (assimilating) and simultaneously modifying (accommodating) one's understanding within a relationship. Relatedness levels and the developmental transitions between them are described in terms of the underlying assimilation and accommodation processes. Within this general approach, the FC:CF+C ratio is defined as reflecting styles of relating to one's interpersonal environment, with each relational style based on normative or on variant relational development. Four fundamental relational styles-healthy, egocentric, veneered egocentric, and defensive-are described and coordinated with the Comprehensive System FC:CF+C potential findings.     

Considerations in collecting Rorschach reference data

Recent Rorschach research with nonpatients has yielded reference data that differ in several respects from nonpatient normative data published for the Comprehensive System (Exner, 1995). Conclusions concerning the implications of these new findings are premature, however, pending careful consideration of appropriate guidelines for collecting Rorschach reference data. In proposing guidelines for future research of this kind, I note (a) that the relatively unstructured nature of Rorschach assessment may complicate obtaining useful data from nonpatient volunteers, (b) that normative studies should include various types of patient as well as nonpatient samples, and (c) that identification of psychological disturbance from Rorschach protocols may be guided more accurately by how closely a record resembles the records of patients with certain disturbances than by how much the record differs from the records of nonpatients.     

Making Rorschach interpretation as good as it can be

This article delineates six guidelines for enhancing the quality and utility of interpretations derived from the Rorschach inkblot method. These include (a) using all of the available structural, thematic, and behavioral data in arriving at interpretations; (b) focusing interpretive statements primarily on personality processes and drawing clinical conclusions and recommendations secondarily on the basis of identified personality processes; (c) addressing interpretations to both personality strengths and personality weaknesses to attend equally to adaptive capacities and maladaptive tendencies; (d) formulating and conveying interpretations at appropriate levels of certainty to distinguish clearly between probable fact and possible conjecture; (e) pursuing and expressing both nomothetic and idiographic implications of interpretations to the fullest possible extent, recognizing that personality is best described by considering both how people resemble and how they differ from each other; and (f) grounding the implications of interpretations in each respondent's cultural context to take adequate account of the mediation of cultural relativism between personality characteristics and their adaptive consequences.     

A meta-analysis of the reliability and validity of the Rorschach

The results of a meta-analysis of Rorschach studies indicate that reliabilities in the order of .83 and higher and validity coefficients of .45 or .50 and higher can be expected for the Rorschach--when hypotheses supported by empirical or theoretical rationales are tested using reasonably powerful statistics. Three important determinants of variance accounted for in a variety of Rorschach scores were identified in 530 statistics from 39 papers published in the Journal of Personality Assessment from 1971 to 1980. The a priori theoretical or empirical evidence determining the likelihood of obtaining significant results, and the power of the statistic used to measure the results, as well as the interaction between the likelihood of results and the power of the statistic used, were all significant determinants of the proportion of variance accounted for in the Rorschach measures reported.     

The test-retest reliability of qualitative data

The test-retest reliability of qualitative items, such as occur in achievement tests, attitude questionnaires, public opinion surveys, and elsewhere, requires a different technique of analysis from that of quantitative variables. Definitions appropriate to the qualitative case are made both for the reliability coefficient of an individual on an item and for the reliability coefficient of a population on the item. From but a single trial of a large population on the item, it is possible to compute alower bound to the group reliability coefficient. Two kinds of lower bounds are presented. From two experimentally independent trials of the population on the item, it is possible to compute anupper bound to the group reliability coefficient. Two upper bounds are presented. The computations for the lower and upper bounds are all very simple. Numerical examples are given.     

Rorschach aggression variables: a study of reliability and validity

This study investigated the extent to which 6 Rorschach variables of aggression (A1, A2, AG, MOR, AgC, AgPast) are related to one another, to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed. [DSM-IV]; American Psychiatric Association, 1994) Cluster B personality disorder criteria, and to self-report measures of anger, aggression, and antisocial behavior. Seventy-eight patients were found to meet DSM-IV criteria for an Axis II disorder, Cluster A personality disorder (paranoid, schizoid, schizotypal) = 9, Cluster B (antisocial personality disorder [ANPD] = 16, borderline personality disorder [BPD] = 23, histrionic personality disorder = 5, narcissistic personality disorder = 12) = 56, and Cluster C personality disorder (avoidant, dependent, obsessive-compulsive) = 13. The results of this study indicated that (a) these 6 Rorschach aggression variables can be scored reliably; (b) 2 factors, revealed by factor analysis, accounted for 77% of the total variance; (c) selected variables were found to be empirically related to DSM-IV diagnostic criteria for ANPD and BPD; and (d) selected variables were found to be empirically related to a self-report measure of anger and antisocial practices. The conceptual nature and clinical utility of these Rorschach aggression variables as well as implications for future research are discussed.     

Rorschach content interpretation in post-traumatic stress disorders: a reply to Carr

In traumatized patients, Rorschach responses draw from a variety of sources, including the traumatic event itself, past and current experiences, and internal fantasy. As complex and highly condensed mental constructions, these responses often serve to reveal the meaning of the trauma in terms of the patient's prevailing personality conflicts. In many cases, this meaning may be hidden in the response's distortion of or elaboration on images drawn from the actual event.     

The reliability of Rorschach variables for inpatients presenting symptoms of depression and/or helplessness

Fifty newly admitted patients presenting symptoms of depression and/or helplessness were recruited to participate in a study concerning depression and randomized into two groups. Rorschachs were administered shortly after admission and then three or four days later. The subjects in the experimental group were instructed to give responses different than they had in the first test. Approximately two-thirds of the responses given by the experimental group in test 2 were different from those in test 1, whereas the control subjects repeated 66% of their test 1 answers in test 2. Retest correlations for 28 variables critical to interpretation show that the two groups differed significantly for four. The retest correlations for four of five variables often used as indices of depressive features were significantly high for both groups. Unusual findings are noted in the retest correlations for FM and m for the Control group and questions are raised concerning the modest retest correlations for CF and C + Cn versus the more commonplace summation of CF + C.