These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Methodological issues in evaluating Rorschach validity: a comment on Burns and Viglione (1996), Weiner (1996), and Ganellen (1996).
    Author: Wood JM, Nezworski MT, Stejskal WJ, Garven S, West SG.
    Journal: Assessment; 1999 Jun; 6(2):115-29. PubMed ID: 10335017.
    Abstract:
    The old controversy regarding the Rorschach Inkblot Test has recently revived. The present article suggests that the debate will be most productive if careful attention is paid to methodological issues. Three recent examples illustrate how incorrect conclusions regarding Rorschach validity may occur if methodological issues are not evaluated carefully. The present article examines (a) Burns and Viglione s (1996) conclusion that the Rorschach Human Experience Variable (HEV) is a predictor of interpersonal relatedness among adults; (b) Weiner s (1996) conclusion that the D score and Morbid Responses (MOR) are valid measures of experienced distress in Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD); and (c) Ganellen s (1996a, 1996b) conclusion that the Rorschach Depression Index (DEPI) and the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) are comparable in their power to identify diagnoses of depression.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]