Defining projective techniques: finding common ground for discourse
Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 23, 2026

Creating Virtual-hand and Virtual-face Illusions to Investigate Self-representation
Published on: March 1, 2017
Abstract:
In 2000 Lilienfeld, Wood, and Garb defined projective tests in a traditional yet loose manner. When a more precise and exclusive definition is furnished, two classes of responses indicative of deviancy can be logically derived. It is suggested that a focused review of the literature yields consistent relations between psychopathology and two response types, falsifications and misrepresentations. This provides common ground for recognizing a circumscribed core of valid predictors across projective techniques.
Related Concept Videos
Techniques of Therapeutic Communication II: Focusing, Paraphrasing, and Summarizing
This therapeutic technique can also be used when a patient brings up pertinent information during a health-related conversation. The...
Processes of Self-Presentation
Impression Management Techniques III: Aligning Actions
Modeling in Therapy
Participant Modeling
Participant modeling involves therapists demonstrating calm and effective behaviors in situations...
Impression Management Techniques I: Managing Appearances
Social Foundations of Self II: The Generalized Other
