(this is about to be a wall of text of slight clarification and my own speculations so ignore if uninterested, I'm not really expecting anyone to read or respond to this and mostly info dumping and theorizing out into the void lol) pretty good notes, but a response to comments near the end, the answers alone arent the only part of the test. To use one of your examples, someone joking with their therapist in their answers could be seen as the patient not taking the test seriously depending on other factors like tone and demeanor. This person could have a variety of reasons like just a rough day or not believing the test has any value, etc. Another person making jokes could also tell the therapist that the patient has insecurities, they may not feel comfortable being vulnerable in their answers, afraid of what their answers say about them. They may be seeking validation, trying to get the therapist to laugh so the patient can feel a sense of adequacy or have a temporary increase in positive self esteem. these are just a few examples of conclusions from 1 behavior shown during testing that would also be taken into account when scoring. Patients may also be asked to give further explanation on their responses for clarification and are given the option to give multiple responses per stimuli. ofc these tests are just tools to aid in diagnostics and not definitive, and like most psych tools they dont work for everyone. I do wonder if these kinds of tests reveal something about different kinds of awareness and/or past experiences though bc the vagueness of what the patient is meant to be answering tends to be difficult amongst many nuerodivergent individuals and/or individuals with high levels of self/situational awareness. Certain answers would also imply the patient has experienced something either in real life or through media they've consumed to not only know of the topic of their response but to also be able to recognize and recall it within vague stimuli. Granted understanding the significance of that isn't immediately answered. At the base line it adds to the list of knowledge a person's pattern recognition can access from past experiences.
Ty for this video... I made my notes from this 😂👍... Hoping to remember this ans well for it can come for 10 marks 😅.... Because its exhausting sometimes to write 100 marks theory paper (10 questions for 10 marks 🤧) ... Thank you again 💯
Hello, Hope you are well. Can you please give an overview of how we should tackle a question on psychometric properties of projective tests? Following is question from one of the exams: (How TAT and Rorschach Ink Blot tests are different in terms of their psychometric qualities? ) I haven't been able to come up with an accurate answer to this. It'd be great if you could guide me. Thanks.
Sorry for the delayed response, I would consider approaching a question like this from the standpoint of an idiographic vs. nomothetic approach to understanding personality. Projective tests like the Rorschach and TAT are more idiographic which means that they may reveal unique aspects of a person rather than universal dimensions. From a psychometric perspective, however, this creates a number of challenges for validity and reliability when it comes to standardizing interpretations of results. Hope this helps!
The Rorschach test isn't generally used as part of diagnosis in the DSM-5 or ICD-11 and in general diagnosis should consist of observation and interview by a psychiatrist, who could then decide which assessments might be most relevant for a particular person and situation. I have a number of video related to the process and complications of diagnosis in this playlist that you may find interesting if you'd like to learn more about diagnosis: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-H3mKXpVvW6k.html
No, though the Rorschach may still be used as part of a group of tests in some personality assessments it wouldn't be the sole basis for diagnosis of a psychological disorder.
