Recommended Readings

[bookwormpsych]

Hello all,

I recently was offered a part time position doing testing under/for a psychologist here in my town. Just administering and scoring (which he checks, of course), no report writing. Anyway, I have experience with many of the tests he administers, except the Rorschach. We were not provided training for this assessment in my graduate program. He is going to let me observe and learn under his supervision. He also wants me to read up on it on my own. So, with that, do any of you have recommended texts and/or articles to read over the Rorschach? This is to familiarize myself with some aspects of the assessment before observing and learning with psychologist.

Thank you ahead of time.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[erg923]

Hello all,

I recently was offered a part time position doing testing under/for a psychologist here in my town. Just administering and scoring (which he checks, of course), no report writing. Anyway, I have experience with many of the tests he administers, except the Rorschach. We were not provided training for this assessment in my graduate program. He is going to let me observe and learn under his supervision. He also wants me to read up on it on my own. So, with that, do any of you have recommended texts and/or articles to read over the Rorschach? This is to familiarize myself with some aspects of the assessment before observing and learning with psychologist.

Thank you ahead of time.

I would search Google for “how reading tea leaves benefits the development of patient’s treatment plan”

 

[bookwormpsych]

I would search Google for “how reading tea leaves benefits the development of patient’s treatment plan”

As I wholly understand that simply reading over the Rorschach is not enough training to administer it (which will not be my only training... just didn't feel the need to explain that to people), I thought this would be the community to ask for recommended readings, so I can at least learn about it. My administration of this is not in the near future. I was just looking for some guidance. But, thanks anyway.

 

[singasongofjoy]

As I wholly understand that simply reading over the Rorschach is not enough training to administer it (which will not be my only training... just didn't feel the need to explain that to people), I thought this would be the community to ask for recommended readings, so I can at least learn about it. My administration of this is not in the near future. I was just looking for some guidance. But, thanks anyway.

I think the message behind erg's post is that projective tests such as the Rorschach are not well-regarded in many (most?) circles these days except maaaaaybe in very circumscribed contexts. So people will have varying opinions of the utility in spending much time learning about administration and interpretation it at all (and also just FYI in addition to all of the inherent problems with projective tests, the Rorschach images and some info about common "good" answers is easily available on the web these days so... problems upon problems).

 

[WisNeuro]

Wood, J. M., Nezworski, M. T., Lilienfeld, S. O., & Garb, H. N. (2003). What's wrong with the Rorschach?: Science confronts the controversial inkblot test. Jossey-Bass.

 

[bookwormpsych]

I think the message behind erg's post is that projective tests such as the Rorschach are not well-regarded in many (most?) circles these days except maaaaaybe in very circumscribed contexts. So people will have varying opinions of the utility in spending much time learning about administration and interpretation it at all (and also just FYI in addition to all of the inherent problems with projective tests, the Rorschach images and some info about common "good" answers is easily available on the web these days so... problems upon problems).

Ohhhhh, okay, I can see how that might be the message behind that comment. I do apologize, then, for my response. I completely understand that. To be honest, I think that was the frame of mind from the professors in my program, hence why we didn't receive any training (other than a brief overview in a text book). If you want my honest opinion, I'm not too sure about projectives either. But, if that is what my supervisor wants and uses, I need money. I just need to receive appropriate training and supervisor to do so. I'm more excited and happy about the idea of scoring MMPIs (I like doing that) or Wechsler tests. I almost hope he decides that he will stick to doing those, and that I can do the others haha

 

[chicandtoughness]

Not trained in Rorschach but work with folks who do. The Rorschach has no diagnostic validity and you cannot "deduce" what is wrong with someone based on what they see in inkblots.

That said, I do know practitioners who use the Rorschach as a purely experiential exercise. Based on what comes up, then the talk therapy can flow. It's in the same vein as Tarot cards and horoscopes - you don't have to believe in them, but if the patient has a visceral reaction to a card that comes up, you can explore what comes up.

Of course, that is not what the Rorschach is meant to be used for at all, so....

 

[AbnormalPsych]

Read the R-PAS manual from front to back. Then do it again.

 

[bookwormpsych]

Read the R-PAS manual from front to back. Then do it again.

Haha, yes, of course! The psychologist is allowing me to borrow his manual and some other readings too!
Read it forward and backwards, backwards and forwards, rinse, wash, repeat! As with all manuals for an assessment someone is learning, I would hope!
Thank you for the feedback

 

[AbnormalPsych]

The Rorschach has no diagnostic validity

Not entirely true, that is a bit of a broad statement.

https://www.utoledo.edu/al/psychology/pdfs/Rorschach%20Test%20Validity.pdf

OP, for articles you can start with the authors and references in the link above.

It's in the same vein as Tarot cards and horoscopes

Definitely not true. What are you basing this on?

Are you familiar with the R-PAS updates? Do Tarot cards have standard scores and norms?

 

[WisNeuro]

Not entirely true, that is a bit of a broad statement.

https://www.utoledo.edu/al/psychology/pdfs/Rorschach%20Test%20Validity.pdf

Definitely not true. What are you basing this on?

Are you familiar with the R-PAS updates? Do Tarot cards have standard scores?

Well, limited utility, and many invalid uses that are still being used in some circumstances. And, as for tarot cards, there actually are scoring systems for those. Instill haven't seen any compelling evidence that the Rorschach does anything beyond some suicidaility and psychosis utility, but even those are something we can do quicker and more reliably with other measures.

 

[borne_before]

I think the message behind erg's post is that projective tests such as the Rorschach are not well-regarded in many (most?) circles these days except maaaaaybe in very circumscribed contexts. So people will have varying opinions of the utility in spending much time learning about administration and interpretation it at all (and also just FYI in addition to all of the inherent problems with projective tests, the Rorschach images and some info about common "good" answers is easily available on the web these days so... problems upon problems).

You'd be surprised. I got crucified in a testing psychologist facebook group for suggesting that.

 

[WisNeuro]

You'd be surprised. I got crucified in a testing psychologist facebook group for suggesting that.

Haven't seen it used in clinical or forensic work in my state for at least the last 4 years. Still exists in some pockets, but definitely seen for what it is in most places.

 

[conky124]

I mean at the end of the day with the Rorschach you will at least have fun, isn't that what this is all about??

 

[WisNeuro]

I mean at the end of the day with the Rorschach you will at least have fun, isn't that what this is all about??

You ever scored that thing? Fun is the last word I'd used to describe it. I also personally consider using it clinically insurance/billing fraud. What a giant waste of time clinically.

 

[AbnormalPsych]

Well, limited utility, and many invalid uses that are still being used in some circumstances. And, as for tarot cards, there actually are scoring systems for those. Instill haven't seen any compelling evidence that the Rorschach does anything beyond some suicidaility and psychosis utility, but even those are something we can do quicker and more reliably with other measures.

Agreed. Limited utility. I haven't used it clinically in years. And only comes out of the closet now for training purposes.

 

[AbnormalPsych]

You ever scored that thing? Fun is the last word I'd used to describe it. I also personally consider using it clinically insurance/billing fraud. What a giant waste of time clinically.

At least the R-PAS limited # of responses. But still, HOURS of time. Not fun.

Regarding billing - I have never billed insurnace for it. Nor would I.

Clinically it has been helpful in very specific circumstances with very specific referral questions. That was probably when R-PAS first came over 7-9 years ago or whenever.

 

[conky124]

Wood, J. M., Nezworski, M. T., Lilienfeld, S. O., & Garb, H. N. (2003). What's wrong with the Rorschach?: Science confronts the controversial inkblot test. Jossey-Bass.

easy jab for Rorschach enthusiasts: I mean, that article is pretty old...

Haven't looked into the research myself because I don't care enough about it, but one of my friends who is really into the R-PAS said there are some promising directions the research is taking. Apparently they may be uncovering reasonably valid ways of detecting disordered personality and other personality traits. The psychosis and suicidal ideation are other domains I hear have some support. However, I seriously doubt there is a good argument for it's utility with all the other better supported, more efficient, and more valid measures out there.

 

[WisNeuro]

easy jab for Rorschach enthusiasts: I mean, that article is pretty old...

Haven't looked into the research myself because I don't care enough about it, but one of my friends who is really into the R-PAS said there are some promising directions the research is taking. Apparently they may be uncovering reasonably valid ways of detecting disordered personality and other personality traits. The psychosis and suicidal ideation are other domains I hear have some support. However, I seriously doubt there is a good argument for it's utility with all the other better supported, more efficient, and more valid measures out there.

That argument does nothing to counter the scientific limitations listed. The jab is meaningless without empirical rebuttals.

 

[conky124]

You ever scored that thing? Fun is the last word I'd used to describe it. I also personally consider using it clinically insurance/billing fraud. What a giant waste of time clinically.

well maybe the waste of time and avoiding patients is exactly what we all need right now

 

[conky124]

That argument does nothing to counter the scientific limitations listed. The jab is meaningless without empirical rebuttals.

I agree it was more of a joke

 

[WisNeuro]

well maybe the waste of time and avoiding patients is exactly what we all need right now

Wasting time is fine, just don't bill for it.

 

[conky124]

Wasting time is fine, just don't bill for it.

You and your article (devil face)

Im all about the non-empirical cheap shots, its a Trump world we are living in.

 

[WisNeuro]

 

[mypointlesspov]

Haven't seen it used in clinical or forensic work in my state for at least the last 4 years. Still exists in some pockets, but definitely seen for what it is in most places.[. /QUOTE]

My research was on producing quality forensic evals for child welfare and way too many psychs in a certain Mid-Atlantic state still use the rorschach.

 

[WisNeuro]

My research was on producing quality forensic evals for child welfare and way too many psychs in a certain Mid-Atlantic state still use the rorschach.

Yeah, from conversations with colleagues, you'll still see it on the coasts and a few isolated pockets here and there, or in older professionals who refuse to learn new things

 

[AbnormalPsych]

For OP:

https://cpspublishinginc.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Mihura-et-al.-2013_CS-MA.pdf

To others who do forensic work (not my area... at all): Curious what you think about this? (I just found this in a quick lit search, haven't read it yet. Will get to it after some patients).

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Robert_Erard/publication/264239619_Setting_the_Record_Straight_Comment_on_Gurley_Piechowski_Sheehan_and_Gray_2014_on_the_Admissibility_of_the_Rorschach_Performance_Assessment_System_R-PAS_in_Court/links/56ae620b08ae19a385160f87/Setting-the-Record-Straight-Comment-on-Gurley-Piechowski-Sheehan-and-Gray-2014-on-the-Admissibility-of-the-Rorschach-Performance-Assessment-System-R-PAS-in-Court.pdf

 

[todpsychmajor]

Hello all,

I recently was offered a part time position doing testing under/for a psychologist here in my town. Just administering and scoring (which he checks, of course), no report writing. Anyway, I have experience with many of the tests he administers, except the Rorschach. We were not provided training for this assessment in my graduate program. He is going to let me observe and learn under his supervision. He also wants me to read up on it on my own. So, with that, do any of you have recommended texts and/or articles to read over the Rorschach? This is to familiarize myself with some aspects of the assessment before observing and learning with psychologist.

Thank you ahead of time.

Irving Weiner’s Principles of Rorschach Interpretation . Incredibly helpful for interpretation

 

[DynamicDidactic]

The Rorschach is a lightning rod for this sort of stuff. It seems you are well aware of its limitations. Maybe you could discuss some of the contentious points with your boss when the timing is right.

 

[Terri Dactyl]

I was trained with the Exner system, and recommend the two books (The Rorschach, Basic Foundations and Principles of Interpretation; and Advanced Interpretation) but it is quite detailed and extensive but provides structure.

The two volumes come with a comprehensive workbook which is invaluable to double, triple, quadruple checking your scoring (A Rorschach Workbook for the Comprehensive System, 5th Ed) But it can only be used with the comprehensive system not as a standalone guide... Which is one of the arguments against the Exner's system.

Otherwise, check out: Essentials of Rorschach Assessment: Comprehensive System and R-PAS By Jessica R. Gurley; or Weiner's book as previously suggested. And if you can find it, I would highly recommend attending workshops so that you can practice and compare your work to peers for inter-rater reliability.

... Aaaaaaaand Rorschach is absolutely defendable on the stand. I'm forensically trained and the Rorschach was used regularly [when clinically relevant] for court ordered competency evaluations for pre-adjudicated offenders, NGRI annual evaluations, and sexually violent predator evaluations in the states of Missouri and Illinois. Both states have large psychodynamic psychological communities which may have an impact on the competency and comfort level of administering and interpreting projective testing such as the Rorschach *drinks the koolaid*

 

[chicandtoughness]

Definitely not true. What are you basing this on?
Are you familiar with the R-PAS updates? Do Tarot cards have standard scores and norms?

Nono, I mean for my colleagues who are using the Rorschach as a conversation opener, the way they're approaching it is akin to how one would use Tarot cards as a launchpad for further exploration. My apologies, the way I originally phrased it made it sound like I was stating it as fact.

I have no experience with the exam as I'm a masters level practitioner. I'm also a psychoanalyst in training so I love me some projective techniques. That said, I don't think projective exercises should be used as a diagnostic method; I prefer they are integrated into the work, similar to how dream analysis is worked into the session instead of being a separate "assessment" in itself. An intervention rather than an assessment, so to speak.

Also, isn't the fact that the inkblots are now published online... idk, kind of problematic? So much opportunity for primed/rehearsed responses.

 

[WisNeuro]

There's always those last pesky vestiges of pseudoscience which will prevail for a bit longer in psychology, MBTI, neuro-linguistic programming, the Rorschach, etc. I wouldn't be surprised to see a resurgence in the current anti-science atmosphere we have today. But, we can hope that maybe someday we'll cast off the snakeoil within our field.

 

[borne_before]

There's always those last pesky vestiges of pseudoscience which will prevail for a bit longer in psychology, MBTI, neuro-linguistic programming, the Rorschach, etc. I wouldn't be surprised to see a resurgence in the current anti-science atmosphere we have today. But, we can hope that maybe someday we'll cast off the snakeoil within our field.

What do you think about IQ denialism?

 

[WisNeuro]

What do you think about IQ denialism?

Not aware of this, can you expand on this idea?

 

[bookwormpsych]

Irving Weiner’s Principles of Rorschach Interpretation . Incredibly helpful for interpretation

Thank you, I appreciate the feedback!

The Rorschach is a lightning rod for this sort of stuff. It seems you are well aware of its limitations. Maybe you could discuss some of the contentious points with your boss when the timing is right.

I think that is a good idea. I'm not entirely sure why he uses this instrument - whether for diagnosis, assisting in treatment planning, a "conversation starter" as someone mentioned above... I think finding that out will also be important. I'm not really too "hyped" about the idea of administering or scoring the assessment either. The other assessments, definitely! This... not so much. I vaguely remember when talking to him a few months ago, he mentioned his orientation was "psychoanalytic" so I wonder if that has something to do with his preference for the Rorschach (not saying everyone with that orientation has that preference, but I do know projectives typically go with that orientation lol). The clinic serves all ages, but most referrals are for school-aged children for things like the WISC, WIAT, and autism-type stuff. I just feel it will be an awesome experience on Fridays (I'm keeping my FT job at the state hospital), even though I might have to learn and give a test that I generally don't agree with :/ My dream goal is obtaining a doctoral degree and primarily doing evaluations, so this is as close as I can get to that for now!

 

[borne_before]

Not aware of this, can you expand on this idea?

It's basically the leftist version of climate change denialism. It's because IQ does hard damage against nuturists. People like Taleb view IQ only as a matter of unintelligence.

 

[WisNeuro]

Can you explain further, I've honesty never heard of the concept.

 

[bookwormpsych]

I agree it was more of a joke

Nothing to do with the actual thread or your response here. But I wanted to know this.... is your username from Trailer Park Boys? If so, that is hilarious, and that show is incredibly stupid (in a funny way).

 

[conky124]

Nothing to do with the actual thread or your response here. But I wanted to know this.... is your username from Trailer Park Boys? If so, that is hilarious, and that show is incredibly stupid (in a funny way).

Yes it is! I still am a huge fan of it (not the recent seasons) but had discovered it back when I made this account. You are the second person on SDN to recognize it!

 

[borne_before]

Yes it is! I still am a huge fan of it (not the recent seasons) but had discovered it back when I made this account. You are the second person on SDN to recognize it!

Was I the first?

 

[AbnormalPsych]

Yes it is! I still am a huge fan of it (not the recent seasons) but had discovered it back when I made this account. You are the second person on SDN to recognize it!

Hey Bubbles, count me in

 

[erg923]

I do NOT buy the notion of "ice breaker" for this, especially if you are actually charging someone for the time spent.

Talk to your patient, your patient's family, and get something that is less academically musing and more prescriptive. At most, maybe do this as part of your therapy or ongoing treatment with the patient? But lets not pretend that this is a cost effective use of someone else's monies in 99% of cases. Combined with a larger battery, its likely that the cost of admin, scoring, and interpretation/write-up is cost prohibitive in terms of overall treatment plan development and eventual treatment outcomes. My experience is that giving a Rorschach makes them "feel better" (like they know something "we" don't) and reinforces a biased view of their own practice patterns. Said practice pattern is not cost efficient or justifiable as measured by any metric that I have ever seen in all my years in clinical practice or corporate managed care.

Basic principles of psychological (clinical) science apply here. Ones own stated "theoretical orientation' is irrelevant here...especially when you expect other people to pay the bill for it.

 

[bookwormpsych]

I understand where you’re coming from. Trust me, I’m not doing this for my academic musing. When I said this was a good opportunity and as close as I can get to my goal, I meant assessment as a whole and the job offer as a whole - NOT just giving the Rorschach.
If, hypothetically I had a practice (which I don’t, and can’t), I would do as you suggested and talk to the clients. However, it isn’t my practice and I won’t be doing any therapy with the clients. The only thing the psychologist asked of me, and will be paying me for, is to administer and score. That’s it.
The only reason I reached out here was to get recommended readings because I know very little about this assessment in regard to administering or scoring. As I discussed above, when the time is right I will talk to my supervisor about my comfort in giving this to clients.

 

[erg923]

I understand where you’re coming from. Trust me, I’m not doing this for my academic musing. When I said this was a good opportunity and as close as I can get to my goal, I meant assessment as a whole and the job offer as a whole - NOT just giving the Rorschach.
If, hypothetically I had a practice (which I don’t, and can’t), I would do as you suggested and talk to the clients. However, it isn’t my practice and I won’t be doing any therapy with the clients. The only thing the psychologist asked of me, and will be paying me for, is to administer and score. That’s it.
The only reason I reached out here was to get recommended readings because I know very little about this assessment in regard to administering or scoring. As I discussed above, when the time is right I will talk to my supervisor about my comfort in giving this to clients.

Fair enough. But beware of "cult of personalty."

Because "I say it is so/I want to know/I am curious about" does not equate to an empirically-based practice. How does the Rorschach help the patient.... because I say so? Yeah? Show me?

 

[conky124]

Fair enough. But beware of "cult of personalty."

Because "I say it is so/I want to know/I am curious about" does not equate to an empirically-based practice. How does the Rorschach help the patient.... because I say so? Yeah? Show me? The WISC, the BASC, Vanderbilt Sales and their norms? Demonstrable.

It's like that scene from Goodfellas, right? Business is bad, huh? Oh, restaurant got hit by lighting? **** you, you pay me!

I don’t get it, how is it like the scene from goodfellas??

I’ve seen that movie a bunch of times.

 

[erg923]

I don’t get it, how is it like the scene from goodfellas??

I’ve seen that movie a bunch of times.

Nevermind. was just being silly.

 

[conky124]

Nevermind. was just being silly.

RIP spider