Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 7, 2026

Advancing Dyslexia Assessment in Children Through Computerized Testing
Published on: August 16, 2024
When Homer nods: an examination of some systematic errors in Rorschach scholarship
1Psychology Department, State University of New York at Buffalo, NY 14260-4110, USA. masling@acsu.buffalo.edu
Abstract:
Considerable evidence has demonstrated that many scientists attempt to avoid disconfirmation of a favored theory. This tendency sometimes characterizes the scholarship of both those who favor the Rorschach (Exner, 2000) method and those who find it seriously flawed. Psychologists who use the Rorschach impressionistically are not deterred by the literature demonstrating that this procedure has thus far shown little established validity. Those who criticize the Rorschach dismiss the objectivity of the American Psychological Association (APA) Blue Ribbon Panel, which concluded that the test has proven validity, and by implication, they also dismiss the APA peer review process that approved the panel report. In addition, they ignore over 400 published studies showing the Rorschach has acceptable validity when responses are scored objectively.
Related Concept Videos
Accuracy and Errors in Hypothesis Testing
In hypothesis testing, the probability of making a Type I error, denoted as α, is commonly set at 0.05. This significance level indicates a 5% chance...
Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...
Self-Presentation: Self-Monitoring and Self-Handicapping
Random and Systematic Errors
Impact of Schemas
Schemata
Two types of schemata are:

