Related Experiment Videos
Call for a moratorium on the use of the Rorschach Inkblot Test in clinical and forensic settings
1University of Pittsburgh, PA, USA. garb.howard@pittsburgh.va.gov
Insights
A moratorium on the Rorschach Inkblot Test is proposed for clinical and forensic use until score validity is confirmed. Current evidence for Rorschach scores is often uninformative, unreplicated, and selectively reported.
Area of Science:
- Psychological assessment
- Clinical psychology
- Forensic psychology
Background:
- The Rorschach Inkblot Test is widely used in clinical and forensic settings.
- Concerns exist regarding the validity and reliability of many Rorschach scores.
- Previous meta-analyses have yielded uninformative results for most Rorschach scores.
Purpose of the Study:
- To call for a moratorium on the clinical and forensic use of the Rorschach Inkblot Test.
- To highlight the lack of validated scores and independent replication for the Rorschach.
- To address the issue of selective reporting in Rorschach research.
Main Methods:
- Review of existing meta-analyses on Rorschach score validity.
- Assessment of incremental validity studies for Rorschach scores.
- Examination of independent replication rates for Rorschach findings.
- Analysis of selective reporting practices in Rorschach research.
Main Results:
- Most meta-analyses on Rorschach scores have been uninformative.
- Incremental validity has not been adequately studied for the majority of Rorschach scores.
- Independent replication of positive Rorschach findings is rare.
- Selective reporting of significant results, while omitting nonsignificant ones, is a prevalent issue.
Conclusions:
- A moratorium on the Rorschach Inkblot Test in clinical and forensic settings is necessary.
- Continued use of the Rorschach risks the interpretation of invalid scores alongside valid ones.
- Further research is required to establish the validity of Rorschach scores before widespread application.
Abstract:
A call is issued for a moratorium on the use of the Rorschach Inkblot Test in clinical and forensic (but not research) settings. The moratorium should last until we have determined which Rorschach scores are valid and which ones are invalid. Unfortunately, for most Rorschach scores, results from meta-analyses have been uninformative. Also, incremental validity has not been studied for most Rorschach scores. Furthermore, positive findings for Rorschach scores have rarely been independently replicated. Finally, selective reporting of results has been a problem: Some investigators report significant results but not nonsignificant results. The magnitude of this problem has not been determined. Unless a moratorium is adopted, clinicians will continue to interpret invalid scores along with valid scores.