Several points: - concerning inter rater reliability, studies find generally kappa coefficients above .75 which is very satisfying - concerning validity Mihura's meta-analyses published 2013 show that the test is as valid as most psychological tests - the efficiency of the method does not lie in secrecy, that the material should be secret, that psychologists are trying to uncover people's secrets. Actually the method is collaborative, the purpose being trying to understand a person's point of view. - there are some links between the test and psychiatric conditions but it is not a psychiatric test. Most of Herman Rorschach original work was about psychological types and perceptual approaches. - Herman Rorschach was a psychoanalyst, but he mentions very clearly in his correspondance that his test is not meant to measure the unconscious. When designing the test he relied more on perception studies and gestalt psychology - sources of information and references should be reported
I did not know much about this test before listening to the video. I find it interesting that it’s used in court proceedings despite the issues with validity.
I was surprised at that as well. One would think this test would have be of no use in court proceedings because they have been published and individuals can study their answers. If polygraphs are inadmissible you would think these would be as well.
Thank you for your video. Some thoughts, the Rorschach was developed as a perception test and he was influenced by experimental psychologist of the time such as Wundt, Helmholtz and several others. The Rorschach is designed to see how the person responds to the stimuli, it is less important what they see. He found during the course of his administration that there were patterns that might be consistent with some disorders vs others that had none. Also, some of the concerns regarding the multiple results from different clinicians are addressed in the development of the Comprehensive System by Exner and the Rorschach Performance Assesment Method developed after his death, to have global normative and uniform values from a much larger sample.
I thought it was interesting that the Rorschach Ink Blot Test was made public. A person can see the images plus the responses. That definitely takes away the validity from this test
With not having researched the Rorschach before, it is interesting to know that the ink blots were actually drawn and not just ink splattered on a piece of paper. I was also unaware that it was made public so one could look at the pictures before hand and find out what the "approved" responses are to answer with.
I thought Dr. Grande's point about how public and well-known this test is, is an extremely important factor in how using this measure could have some underlying negative factors.
There was little I knew about the ink lot test except what I have seen on tv. I think it was interesting that rorsach drew the images himself. Showing the various tlevels of validity I n comparison to this test helped me better understand those terms.
It is interesting that this test does an okay job at detecting schizophrenia, based on some studies. I would not have thought that this could be the case. I love the fact that projective tests have a psychodynamic aspect to them, I am more of an abstract thinker that appreciates psychodynamic theory as well.
I've been treated for depression since 2003. I was never given the test. Now I feel cheated. It's kinda disappointing . (*sarcasm) In fact I've never lied down on a couch and discussed my issues with a little old man with a German accent neither. (. ❛ ᴗ ❛.)
Thanks for the overview on the differences in reliability and validity! After learning about the issues with the Rorschach Test, I’d say the test is not valid because it doesn’t always measure what it is supposed to.
This is funny because I answered this on Quora with the exact same format of this video and the same reasons why it isn't as strong of a diagnostic tool.
If it is, I'm a weirdo because I saw two turkeys playing patty cake with orange boots on 🤣🤪. Most others were pretty normal tho. I'm a boring weirdo. Valid. 😁
Several points:
- concerning inter rater reliability, studies find generally kappa coefficients above .75 which is very satisfying
- concerning validity Mihura's meta-analyses published 2013 show that the test is as valid as most psychological tests
- the efficiency of the method does not lie in secrecy, that the material should be secret, that psychologists are trying to uncover people's secrets. Actually the method is collaborative, the purpose being trying to understand a person's point of view.
- there are some links between the test and psychiatric conditions but it is not a psychiatric test. Most of Herman Rorschach original work was about psychological types and perceptual approaches.
- Herman Rorschach was a psychoanalyst, but he mentions very clearly in his correspondance that his test is not meant to measure the unconscious. When designing the test he relied more on perception studies and gestalt psychology
- sources of information and references should be reported
As an artist, I find this VERY interesting!!! Thank you!
I did not know much about this test before listening to the video. I find it interesting that it’s used in court proceedings despite the issues with validity.
I was surprised at that as well. One would think this test would have be of no use in court proceedings because they have been published and individuals can study their answers. If polygraphs are inadmissible you would think these would be as well.
Polygraphs also came to my mind when listening to this video. Reliability and validity play large roles with these types of tests.
Thank you for your video. Some thoughts, the Rorschach was developed as a perception test and he was influenced by experimental psychologist of the time such as Wundt, Helmholtz and several others. The Rorschach is designed to see how the person responds to the stimuli, it is less important what they see. He found during the course of his administration that there were patterns that might be consistent with some disorders vs others that had none. Also, some of the concerns regarding the multiple results from different clinicians are addressed in the development of the Comprehensive System by Exner and the Rorschach Performance Assesment Method developed after his death, to have global normative and uniform values from a much larger sample.
I thought it was interesting that the Rorschach Ink Blot Test was made public. A person can see the images plus the responses. That definitely takes away the validity from this test
With not having researched the Rorschach before, it is interesting to know that the ink blots were actually drawn and not just ink splattered on a piece of paper. I was also unaware that it was made public so one could look at the pictures before hand and find out what the "approved" responses are to answer with.
Thank you for your continue thoroughness!:)
I thought Dr. Grande's point about how public and well-known this test is, is an extremely important factor in how using this measure could have some underlying negative factors.
This test seems a lot more intricate than what I originally thought it was, this was good information on understanding it furthermore.
I agree and had fun learning new information from this video. It has helped me to appreciate this test more, along with other projective assessments.
If all doctors are in concurrence, it might be valid. But no two doctors can agree on anything.
There was little I knew about the ink lot test except what I have seen on tv. I think it was interesting that rorsach drew the images himself. Showing the various tlevels of validity I n comparison to this test helped me better understand those terms.
Dude, the "widely available" point definitely required a "click here" button!
Very interesting! The ink blots were actually hand drawn, and without any clear answer in mind in order for them to be open to interpretation.
It is interesting that this test does an okay job at detecting schizophrenia, based on some studies. I would not have thought that this could be the case. I love the fact that projective tests have a psychodynamic aspect to them, I am more of an abstract thinker that appreciates psychodynamic theory as well.
I've been treated for depression since 2003. I was never given the test. Now I feel cheated. It's kinda disappointing . (*sarcasm)
In fact I've never lied down on a couch and discussed my issues with a little old man with a German accent neither. (. ❛ ᴗ ❛.)
You missed something here! Hahaha. 😊
Thanks for the overview on the differences in reliability and validity!
After learning about the issues with the Rorschach Test, I’d say the test is not valid because it doesn’t always measure what it is supposed to.
How do we ask questions? I would like a video on the ACE test.
Thanks Todd, was worried I'd have to do a big literature dive 😜
Projection is a real thing? Isnt it actually psychoanalysis??
This is an outdated information in regards of the Rorschach.
I can rarely see anything in those ink blots. They just look like a mess. What does that say about me?😂😮😂
This is funny because I answered this on Quora with the exact same format of this video and the same reasons why it isn't as strong of a diagnostic tool.
If it is, I'm a weirdo because I saw two turkeys playing patty cake with orange boots on 🤣🤪. Most others were pretty normal tho. I'm a boring weirdo. Valid. 😁
0:37 "psyhco analyst" ... this tells so much, because psycho analysis is not a science.