PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

M T Nezworski

Publications and source records attributed to M T Nezworski.

9 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2001

Toward a resolution of the Rorschach controversy.

Comments are made about the articles comprising the first round of the Special Series on the Rorschach. G. Stricker and J. R. Gold (1999) and D. J. Viglione (1999) praised the Rorschach, but they consistently failed to cite negative findings. R. M. Dawes (1999) obtained results that provide modest support for the Rorschach, but one of his data sets is flawed. J. B. Hiller, R. Rosenthal, R. F. Bornstein, D. T. R. Berry, and S. Brunell-Neuleib (1999) reported the results of a meta-analysis, but, among other problems, their coders were not blind to the results of all the studies. J. Hunsley and J. M. Bailey (1999) made a strong case for concluding that there is no scientific basis for using the Rorschach. Recommendations are made for resolving the Rorschach controversy.

Depressive Disorder↗
PubMed2001

Advancing scientific discourse in the controversy surrounding the Comprehensive System for the Rorschach: a rejoinder to Meyer (2000).

A recent commentary by Meyer (2000) in the Journal of Personality Assessment alleged that Rorschach critic Wood and his colleagues had intentionally published information that they knew to be in error. To substantiate this contention, Meyer's commentary published information that was part of the peer review process at another journal. In this rejoinder, we present factual information that shows we have consistently acted in good faith. This rejoinder suggests that the scientific debate regarding the Comprehensive System for the Rorschach is unlikely to be advanced by speculating about the intentions of Rorschach critics, or by publishing information from the peer review process that is usually kept confidential.

Data Interpretation, Statistical↗
PubMed2001

Coming to grips with negative evidence for the Comprehensive System for the Rorschach: a comment on Gacono, Loving, and Bodholdt; Ganellen; and Bornstein.

The Comprehensive System (CS; Exner, 1991, 1993) for the Rorschach is currently engulfed in controversy. This comment article responds to 3 articles by Rorschach proponents in this issue of the Journal of Personality Assessment. Contrary to the claims of Gacono, Loving, and Bodholdt (this issue), CS scores do not bear a well-demonstrated relationship to psychopathy, antisocial personality disorder, or conduct disorder. Contrary to the claims of Ganellen (this issue), both the original and the revised CS Depression Index (Exner, 1993) bear little or no relationship to depression diagnoses. Furthermore, the scoring reliability of some CS scores is problematic. Although we agree with Bornstein (this issue) that Rorschach scores generally bear little or no relation to psychiatric diagnoses or self-report questionnaires, we believe this lack of relationship tends to disconfirm hypotheses concerning the validity of the Rorschach. In the spirit of the philosopher Sir Karl Popper, the Rorschach community should not minimize negative evidence or engage in post hoc arguments to immunize the CS against falsification.

Humans↗
PubMed2000

The Rorschach test in clinical diagnosis: a critical review, with a backward look at Garfield (1947).

The present article comments on a classic study by Garfield (1947) then reviews research on the Rorschach and psychiatric diagnoses. Despite a few positive findings, the Rorschach has demonstrated little validity as a diagnostic tool. Deviant verbalizations and bad form on the Rorschach, and indices based on these variables, are related to Schizophrenia and perhaps to Bipolar Disorder and Schizotypal Personality Disorder. Patients with Borderline Personality Disorder also seem to give an above-average number of deviant verbalizations. Otherwise the Rorschach has not shown a well-demonstrated relationship to these disorders or to Major Depressive Disorder, Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), anxiety disorders other than PTSD, Dissociative Identity Disorder, Dependent, Narcissistic, or Antisocial Personality Disorders, Conduct Disorder, or psychopathy.

History, 20th Century↗
PubMed2000

Projective techniques and the detection of child sexual abuse.

Projective techniques (e.g., the Rorschach, Human Figure Drawings) are sometimes used to detect child sexual abuse. West recently conducted a meta-analysis on this topic, but she systematically excluded nonsignificant results. In this article, a reanalysis of her data is presented. The authors conclude that projective techniques should not be used to detect child sexual abuse. Many of the studies purportedly demonstrating validity are flawed, and none of the projective test scores have been well replicated.

Bias↗
PubMed1999

Methodological issues in evaluating Rorschach validity: a comment on Burns and Viglione (1996), Weiner (1996), and Ganellen (1996)

The old controversy regarding the Rorschach Inkblot Test has recently revived. The present article suggests that the debate will be most productive if careful attention is paid to methodological issues. Three recent examples illustrate how incorrect conclusions regarding Rorschach validity may occur if methodological issues are not evaluated carefully. The present article examines (a) Burns and Viglione s (1996) conclusion that the Rorschach Human Experience Variable (HEV) is a predictor of interpersonal relatedness among adults; (b) Weiner s (1996) conclusion that the D score and Morbid Responses (MOR) are valid measures of experienced distress in Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD); and (c) Ganellen s (1996a, 1996b) conclusion that the Rorschach Depression Index (DEPI) and the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) are comparable in their power to identify diagnoses of depression.

Adult↗
PubMed1985

Cognitive-behavioral approaches to children's problems.

Selected issues in theory, research, methodology, assessment, and outcome are briefly discussed in the context of cognitive-behavioral approaches to children's problems. Distinctions between rationalistic and developmental varieties of cognitive approaches are delineated. Different assumptions are explored regarding the function and nature of cognitive processes, the nature and mechanisms of psychological change, and the relationship between cognitive and emotional processes. It is concluded that the empirical status of cognitive-behavioral approaches to children's problems is equivocal. The theoretical status of traditional (rationalistic) cognitive treatments is also challenged, and developmental, process-oriented conceptualizations and research are endorsed as more adequate and promising perspectives in this area.

Behavior Therapy↗