Ping: Eaglesfan27

[Drake]

I'm interested in your take on the Rorschach test controversy over at Wikipedia:

The Buzz Log - This Is Only a Test: Rorschach Blots Rocking the Web - Yahoo! Buzz

Ever take the inkblot test—or at least see one administered on TV (like in any "Law & Order" episode)? If so, then you know that there are no right or wrong answers on a Rorschach test, but responses do provide insight to the test-taker's state of mind.

And yet, a controversy about the posting of 10 Rorschach inkblots on Wikipedia is rocking the scientific community, according to The New York Times. In addition to the blots themselves, the Wikipedia entry also includes the most common interpretations of what these blots look like—the old bison vs. butterfly vs. moth.

Taking the Test
The Rorschach test—a series of ink blots shown to patients, who are then asked to explain what they see—is named after Swiss psychologist Hermann Rorschach. Five of the blots are black-and-white, two are black, white, and red, and the last three are in pretty colors. (Or not pretty, depending on your view.)

The test-taker is evaluated on 100 variables, which will show what he/she truly feels deep inside—not just separating psychotic thinking from "normal" thought. One Rorschach FAQ site describes it as asking "How does someone view and organize the world around them?"

One nonprofit parenting site, SPARC, explains that it's not only what patients say in describing what they see, but also what "hand gestures and body movements" they make. (Interestingly, SPARC precedes its lengthy description of the whole process with a disclaimer, posted "after repeated letters from dozens of outraged psychologists and psychiatrists.")

Illuminating or Cheating?
Is the test's public availability stimulating free debate, or enabling test-takers to "cheat"? Depends on how you look at it:

• From the Wiki view: Supporters say it's informative—and searches on Yahoo! for "rorschach" have popped up 111% in the past week.

• From the psychologists' view: These "cheats" could help test-takers game the system and get in the way of research. And if patients peek at the interpretations beforehand, they may get in the way of their own diagnoses.

• From the test publishers' view: The test's publisher is "assessing legal steps" to have the images removed from Wikipedia, even though those images—created some 90 years ago—are in the public domain. Still, one spokesperson huffed that Wikipedia's position is "unbelievably reckless and even cynical" for recognizing concerned claims and posting the images anyhow.

But Does One See Results?
Despite the outrage over Wikipedia's posting, not all researchers believe in the test's validity. The method was severely criticized in the 1950s and revised in the 1970s. Scientific American revived its 2005 article that called Rorschach's test "frequently ineffective" as a mental health tool.

Ideally, at least two clinicians should be involved in the interpretation of the test's results, but often they may not agree. Even worse, according to the article "What's Wrong With This Picture?", research also "suggests" that the Rorschach can't really gauge violent tendencies, depression, sexual abuse in children, antisocial tendencies, and so on. Since the test is administered to all kinds of people, from convicts seeking parole to parents in custody battles, obviously a lot rides on the interpretation of the results.

By the way, the Wikipedia uproar erupted in June, when an emergency-room doctor added the remaining nine inkblots to the one Wikipedia already had. When The New York Times told the doctor about all the experts' complaints, he replied, "Show me the evidence." Preferably not in the form of an inkblot.

I honestly didn't realize that the Rorschach test was still considered a valid/useful diagnostic technique.

[Kodos]

I see. How does that make you feel?

[KWhit]

I went into my psychiatrist's office the other day and I said to him, "I'm a pup tent. I'm a tee pee. I'm a pup tent. I'm a tee pee. I'm a pup tent. I'm a tee pee."

The doctor looked at me and said, "I know what you're problem is.

"You're two tents."

[Honolulu_Blue]

Hrmm...

[chesapeake]

Originally Posted by KWhit

I went into my psychiatrist's office the other day and I said to him, "I'm a pup tent. I'm a tee pee. I'm a pup tent. I'm a tee pee. I'm a pup tent. I'm a tee pee."

The doctor looked at me and said, "I know what you're problem is.

"You're two tents."

I usually go with wigwam and tee pee. Pup tent gives away too much of your punch line.

[DaddyTorgo]

I took the Rorschach test way back when and apparently because I saw no "human figures" I am like not very empathic or something? Not sure I buy that based on factual evidence, but it was amusing.

[Kodos]

You cold, inhuman bastard!

[DaddyTorgo]

not my fault none of the shapes looked like people - they all looked like animals - fish and monkeys and shit...nothing that was bipedal with significant limbs and lacking in what could be seen as a tail

*shrugs*

[Mustang]

Woman with large breasts... woman with medium breasts... this one looks like you... with breasts.

[Coffee Warlord]

The money's good, the scenery changes, and they let me play with explosives.

[Drake]

For the record, other than a couple of the obvious ones that look like bats/moths and the one that looks like two gnomes in red hats talking to each other, most of them look like either alien space ships or those odd glowing jellyfish/sea creatures you see on the Discovery channel documentaries.

[Mustang]

If Dr. Richard Graham has his way, massively popular online game World of Warcraft will soon get an unofficial new character class: the therapist.

According to The Daily Telegraph, the London psychiatrist is spearheading a movement that would let mental health workers join online game worlds as avatars in order to better treat players suffering from game addiction.

Dr. Graham believes the key is reaching at-risk players on their own turf.

"Those affected don't exhibit the same outward warning signs as most teenage anti-social behaviour issues do because they're in their bedrooms most of the time, seemingly out of trouble," he told the Telegraph. "Because of this we can't get through to them in the traditional educational environment or intrude on their actual bedrooms -- we need to turn to the Internet itself to tackle these problems."

The issue of game addiction itself is still quite thorny. The American Medical Association still doesn't consider game addiction to be a legitimate disorder, while other reports -- including a Swedish study claiming that Warcraft is "more addictive than crack cocaine" -- say otherwise.

Graham hopes to launch the project "by the end of the year," and has called on Warcraft maker Blizzard to possibly give therapists free access to the game. He also notes that since most therapists probably aren't Warcraft experts, the project could potentially recruit gamers to act as "peer mentors" and help identify troubled players.

[MikeVic]

Originally Posted by Mustang

Graham hopes to launch the project "by the end of the year," and has called on Warcraft maker Blizzard to possibly give therapists free access to the game. He also notes that since most therapists probably aren't Warcraft experts, the project could potentially recruit gamers to act as "peer mentors" and help identify troubled players.

Aha! Motive for this "therapist" found!

[Eaglesfan27]

Personally, I think the Rorschach is of very limited utility and prefer other projective tests more, but I rarely use projective tests so I'm not an authority in that area. However, I can imagine some of my older professors being incensed by this. Then again, there is information out there that can foul up any study or any attempt at a diagnosis if one is determined to try to do so. For example, when the PTSD criteria for the DSM was being developed in the 70's, there was a typo in the first draft that somehow got circulated. As a result, there were some veterans who were looking to game the system who came into the VA clinics with these huge quilts. The criteria for PTSD talked about survivor's guilt but that typo made it fairly easy to spot some of the angle shooters.

[QuikSand]

Originally Posted by Honolulu_Blue

Hrmm...

Excellent.

[cartman]

This reminds me of the Beavis and Butthead episode when they are administered Rorschach tests, and they said every one of them was a guy whacking off. When they were shown a regular picture, they said it was just a bunch of random lines.

[Drake]

Thanks for your thoughts, EF27.

[kcchief19]

Originally Posted by KWhit

I went into my psychiatrist's office the other day and I said to him, "I'm a pup tent. I'm a tee pee. I'm a pup tent. I'm a tee pee. I'm a pup tent. I'm a tee pee."

The doctor looked at me and said, "I know what you're problem is.

"You're two tents."

Insert wigwam for pup tent and you increase the funny by 41 percent.

[KWhit]

Nah. Dr. Katz used pup tent, so that's good enough for me.

[Schmidty]

EF27 is like the Yoda for batshit crazy people like me.