Rorschach tests

For those interested in using Wikipedia for research (or assisting students to use it wisely in their work), this might be of interest:

There’s debate on the content, an example of Wikipedia ‘locking’ a page until disputes are settled, and it illustrates Wikipedia’s editing policies in action.

Of course, it’s not uninteresting on the subject of Rorschach tests as well – but caveat emptor!

One comment on “Rorschach tests
  1. Many professionals feel that the Rorschach is outdated, inaccurate, and meaningless. For example:

    “Nobody agrees how to score Rorschach responses objectively. There is nothing to show what any particular response means to the person who gives it. And, there is nothing to show what it means if a number of people give the same response. The ink blots are scientifically useless.” (Bartol, 1983).

    “The only thing the inkblots do reveal is the secret world of the examiner who interprets them. These doctors are probably saying more about themselves than about the subjects.” (Anastasi, 1982).

    But how many people see suggestive sexual imagery in a simple campfire and for those who do, what is the implication?

    See, e.g.,
    “Card Tricks Revealed: How Not To Burn Money”

Leave a Comment (note: all comments are moderated)

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

(you can use <b>bold</b> or <i>italic</i> markers)


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.