Meta-analysis of studies assessing the efficacy of projective techniques in discriminating child sexual abuse

This meta-analysis of 12 studies assesses the efficacy of projective techniques to discriminate between sexually abused children and nonsexually abused children.

A literature search was conducted to identify published studies that used projective instruments with sexually abused children. Those studies that reported statistics that allowed for an effect size to be calculated, were then included in the meta-analysis. There were 12 studies that fit the criteria. The projectives reviewed include The Rorschach, The Hand Test, The Thematic Apperception Test (TAT), the Kinetic Family Drawings, Human Figure Drawings, Draw Your Favorite Kind of Day, The Rosebush: A Visualization Strategy, and The House-Tree-Person.

The results of this analysis gave an over-all effect size of d = .81, which is a large effect. Six studies included only a norm group of nondistressed, nonabused children with the sexual abuse group. The average effect size was d = .87, which is impressive. Six studies did include a clinical group of distressed nonsexually abused subjects and the effect size lowered to d = .76, which is a medium to large effect.

This indicates that projective instruments can discriminate distressed children from nondistressed subjects, quite well. In the studies that included a clinical group of distressed children who were not sexually abused, the lower effect size indicates that the instruments were less able to discriminate the type of distress. This meta-analysis gives evidence that projective techniques have the ability to discriminate between children who have been sexually abused and those who were not abused sexually. However, further research that is designed to include clinical groups of distressed children is needed in order to determine how well the projectives can discriminate the type of distress.