The Effect of CS Administration or an R-Optimized Alternative on Potential Projective Material in Rorschach Responses From Six Studies and a Meta-Analysis of Their Findings

Gregory J. Meyer, Abufazel Hosseininasab, Donald J. Viglione, Joni L. Mihura, Ety Berant, Ana Cristina Resende, Jennifer Barsky Reese

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

The Rorschach Performance Assessment System (R-PAS; Meyer, Viglione, Mihura, Erard, & Erdberg, 2011) introduced R-optimized administration to reduce variability in the number of Responses (R). We provide new data from six studies of participants randomly assigned to receive a version of this method or Comprehensive System (CS; Exner, 2003) administration. We examine how administration methods affect 3 types of codes most likely to contain potential projective material and the frequency of these codes for the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, or last response to a card (R in Card). In a meta-analytic summary, we found 37% of responses have 1 type of code, 19% have 2 types, and 3% have all 3 types, with stable proportions across responses within cards. Importantly, administration method had no impact on potential projective variable means. Differential skew across samples made variability harder to interpret. Initial results suggesting differences in 3 of the 18 specific Type by R in Card pairs did not follow a coherent pattern and disappeared when using raw counts from all participants. Overall, data do not support concerns that R-optimized administration might alter potential projective processes, or make potentially “signature” last responses to the card any different in R-PAS than the CS.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalJournal of Personality Assessment
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Jan 1 2018
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Meta-Analysis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Psychology
  • Psychiatry and Mental health
  • Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis

Cite this

The Effect of CS Administration or an R-Optimized Alternative on Potential Projective Material in Rorschach Responses From Six Studies and a Meta-Analysis of Their Findings. / Meyer, Gregory J.; Hosseininasab, Abufazel; Viglione, Donald J.; Mihura, Joni L.; Berant, Ety; Resende, Ana Cristina; Reese, Jennifer Barsky.

In: Journal of Personality Assessment, 01.01.2018.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Meyer, Gregory J. ; Hosseininasab, Abufazel ; Viglione, Donald J. ; Mihura, Joni L. ; Berant, Ety ; Resende, Ana Cristina ; Reese, Jennifer Barsky. / The Effect of CS Administration or an R-Optimized Alternative on Potential Projective Material in Rorschach Responses From Six Studies and a Meta-Analysis of Their Findings. In: Journal of Personality Assessment. 2018.
@article{107ef3794aad48fc99dc1f1edbe7e168,
title = "The Effect of CS Administration or an R-Optimized Alternative on Potential Projective Material in Rorschach Responses From Six Studies and a Meta-Analysis of Their Findings",
abstract = "The Rorschach Performance Assessment System (R-PAS; Meyer, Viglione, Mihura, Erard, & Erdberg, 2011) introduced R-optimized administration to reduce variability in the number of Responses (R). We provide new data from six studies of participants randomly assigned to receive a version of this method or Comprehensive System (CS; Exner, 2003) administration. We examine how administration methods affect 3 types of codes most likely to contain potential projective material and the frequency of these codes for the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, or last response to a card (R in Card). In a meta-analytic summary, we found 37{\%} of responses have 1 type of code, 19{\%} have 2 types, and 3{\%} have all 3 types, with stable proportions across responses within cards. Importantly, administration method had no impact on potential projective variable means. Differential skew across samples made variability harder to interpret. Initial results suggesting differences in 3 of the 18 specific Type by R in Card pairs did not follow a coherent pattern and disappeared when using raw counts from all participants. Overall, data do not support concerns that R-optimized administration might alter potential projective processes, or make potentially “signature” last responses to the card any different in R-PAS than the CS.",
author = "Meyer, {Gregory J.} and Abufazel Hosseininasab and Viglione, {Donald J.} and Mihura, {Joni L.} and Ety Berant and Resende, {Ana Cristina} and Reese, {Jennifer Barsky}",
year = "2018",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1080/00223891.2018.1492926",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Journal of Personality Assessment",
issn = "0022-3891",
publisher = "Taylor and Francis Ltd.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The Effect of CS Administration or an R-Optimized Alternative on Potential Projective Material in Rorschach Responses From Six Studies and a Meta-Analysis of Their Findings

AU - Meyer, Gregory J.

AU - Hosseininasab, Abufazel

AU - Viglione, Donald J.

AU - Mihura, Joni L.

AU - Berant, Ety

AU - Resende, Ana Cristina

AU - Reese, Jennifer Barsky

PY - 2018/1/1

Y1 - 2018/1/1

N2 - The Rorschach Performance Assessment System (R-PAS; Meyer, Viglione, Mihura, Erard, & Erdberg, 2011) introduced R-optimized administration to reduce variability in the number of Responses (R). We provide new data from six studies of participants randomly assigned to receive a version of this method or Comprehensive System (CS; Exner, 2003) administration. We examine how administration methods affect 3 types of codes most likely to contain potential projective material and the frequency of these codes for the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, or last response to a card (R in Card). In a meta-analytic summary, we found 37% of responses have 1 type of code, 19% have 2 types, and 3% have all 3 types, with stable proportions across responses within cards. Importantly, administration method had no impact on potential projective variable means. Differential skew across samples made variability harder to interpret. Initial results suggesting differences in 3 of the 18 specific Type by R in Card pairs did not follow a coherent pattern and disappeared when using raw counts from all participants. Overall, data do not support concerns that R-optimized administration might alter potential projective processes, or make potentially “signature” last responses to the card any different in R-PAS than the CS.

AB - The Rorschach Performance Assessment System (R-PAS; Meyer, Viglione, Mihura, Erard, & Erdberg, 2011) introduced R-optimized administration to reduce variability in the number of Responses (R). We provide new data from six studies of participants randomly assigned to receive a version of this method or Comprehensive System (CS; Exner, 2003) administration. We examine how administration methods affect 3 types of codes most likely to contain potential projective material and the frequency of these codes for the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, or last response to a card (R in Card). In a meta-analytic summary, we found 37% of responses have 1 type of code, 19% have 2 types, and 3% have all 3 types, with stable proportions across responses within cards. Importantly, administration method had no impact on potential projective variable means. Differential skew across samples made variability harder to interpret. Initial results suggesting differences in 3 of the 18 specific Type by R in Card pairs did not follow a coherent pattern and disappeared when using raw counts from all participants. Overall, data do not support concerns that R-optimized administration might alter potential projective processes, or make potentially “signature” last responses to the card any different in R-PAS than the CS.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85052280051&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85052280051&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/00223891.2018.1492926

DO - 10.1080/00223891.2018.1492926

M3 - Article

C2 - 30142303

AN - SCOPUS:85052280051

JO - Journal of Personality Assessment

JF - Journal of Personality Assessment

SN - 0022-3891

ER -