Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Self-Report Tests of Personality01:22

Self-Report Tests of Personality

415
Self-report inventories are objective personality assessments that use multiple-choice items or numbered scales, typically ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). They are often called Likert scales after Rensis Likert. These inventories are widely used due to their ease of administration and cost-effectiveness. One of the most prominent examples is the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI), initially developed in the 1940s to assess abnormal personality traits.
415
Receiver Operating Characteristic Plot01:15

Receiver Operating Characteristic Plot

303
A ROC (Receiver Operating Characteristic) plot is a graphical tool used to assess the performance of a binary classification model by illustrating the trade-off between sensitivity (true positive rate) and specificity (false positive rate). By plotting sensitivity against 1 - specificity across various threshold settings, the ROC curve shows how well the model distinguishes between classes, with a curve closer to the top-left corner indicating a more accurate model. The area under the ROC curve...
303

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Evaluating LLM-Based Coders in Psychological Assessment: A Validation Framework With Application to the Rorschach Morbid Content Variable.

Assessment·2026
Same author

Assessing the Validity of the Dimensional Clinical Personality Inventory 2 as a Measure of HiTOP Spectra: Identifying the Optimal Placement of the Anankastia Factor.

Scandinavian journal of psychology·2025
Same author

Cross-cultural similarities and differences in level of personality functioning across eight countries.

Psychology, health & medicine·2025
Same author

Behavioral signs of trauma on the Rorschach: Development of the Trauma Experience Index.

Psychological trauma : theory, research, practice and policy·2025
Same author

Development and Validation of Dimensional Clinical Personality Inventory 2 (IDCP-2) Algorithms to Assess ICD-11 Personality Trait Domain Qualifiers.

Assessment·2024
Same author

Developmental cascades from early childhood attachment security to adolescent level of personality functioning among high-risk youth.

Development and psychopathology·2024

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Aug 13, 2025

Author Spotlight: Self-Assessment Protocol for Predicting Psoriatic Arthritis in Psoriasis Patients
02:28

Author Spotlight: Self-Assessment Protocol for Predicting Psoriatic Arthritis in Psoriasis Patients

Published on: March 1, 2024

475

Comparing the Validity of the Rorschach Performance Assessment System and Exner's Comprehensive System to

Giselle Pianowski1, Anna Elisa de Villemor-Amaral1, Gregory J Meyer2

  • 1Universidade São Francisco, São Paulo, Brazil.

Assessment
|January 20, 2023
PubMed
Summary

The Rorschach Performance Assessment System (R-PAS) offers a more reliable assessment of psychological health than the Comprehensive System (CS), especially for patients. R-PAS improves interpretation and accurately identifies psychopathology markers.

Keywords:
Rorschachassessmentperformance testspsychopathology severity

More Related Videos

Conscious and Non-conscious Representations of Emotional Faces in Asperger's Syndrome
08:31

Conscious and Non-conscious Representations of Emotional Faces in Asperger's Syndrome

Published on: July 31, 2016

13.4K
SECONDs Administration Guidelines: A Fast Tool to Assess Consciousness in Brain-injured Patients
11:05

SECONDs Administration Guidelines: A Fast Tool to Assess Consciousness in Brain-injured Patients

Published on: February 6, 2021

15.1K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Aug 13, 2025

Author Spotlight: Self-Assessment Protocol for Predicting Psoriatic Arthritis in Psoriasis Patients
02:28

Author Spotlight: Self-Assessment Protocol for Predicting Psoriatic Arthritis in Psoriasis Patients

Published on: March 1, 2024

475
Conscious and Non-conscious Representations of Emotional Faces in Asperger's Syndrome
08:31

Conscious and Non-conscious Representations of Emotional Faces in Asperger's Syndrome

Published on: July 31, 2016

13.4K
SECONDs Administration Guidelines: A Fast Tool to Assess Consciousness in Brain-injured Patients
11:05

SECONDs Administration Guidelines: A Fast Tool to Assess Consciousness in Brain-injured Patients

Published on: February 6, 2021

15.1K

Area of Science:

  • Psychological assessment
  • Clinical psychology
  • Psychopathology

Background:

  • The Rorschach Performance Assessment System (R-PAS) and Comprehensive System (CS) are widely used for psychological assessment.
  • Previous research by Pianowski et al. compared these systems in nonpatients.
  • Further investigation is needed to compare R-PAS and CS in patient populations.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To compare the Rorschach Performance Assessment System (R-PAS) and Comprehensive System (CS) in differentiating patients from nonpatients.
  • To evaluate the number of responses (R), variability in R, and Complexity scores between the two systems.
  • To assess the effectiveness of psychopathology markers in each system.

Main Methods:

  • Data from 100 nonpatients and 100 patients were analyzed using both R-PAS and CS.
  • Fifty participants were assessed with each system.
  • Key metrics included the number of responses (R), variability in R, and Complexity scores.

Main Results:

  • R-PAS yielded a more optimal number of responses (R) for interpretation and reduced the need for re-administration due to low R compared to CS.
  • R-PAS protocols showed less variability in R despite a higher number of responses.
  • Both systems identified psychopathology markers, but R-PAS demonstrated stronger effects.
  • Complexity scores in R-PAS effectively discriminated patients from nonpatients, with patients showing less complex records; CS's Complexity scores were obscured by higher standard deviations.

Conclusions:

  • R-PAS provides a more reliable and valid assessment of psychopathology compared to CS, particularly in patient samples.
  • The R-PAS system's consistency in response numbers and the utility of Complexity scores enhance its diagnostic utility.
  • Findings have implications for clinical practice and future research in Rorschach assessment.