Inkbot testing is one of the main projective tests that are used. These pictures are used to determine the personality traits of people by asking them to say what they believe the inkblot resembles. However this test has many problems with it. First, this test requires the tester to decide on what interpretations mean what. This allows for the human element of error to come into effect on the results. This test also has very low incremental validity. There is also very little association between the results of the test and personality traits. To add on to this long list of problems it is also very easy to fake the answers and get a false diagnosis.
In the article A few blots in the copybook Gregory Meyer and his colleagues looked into the reliability of the test and found that there is some power within the test, but there are also some basic traditional pieces that can be rejected. Based off of the results that he gathered he figures that that the current way that the test is being used the results are useless. Some of the basic ideas that he rejects are that people that look into the details are obsessive and that if the examiner can not find something within the blot that the participant does the participant has impaired perception.
I believe that these findings are probably closer to the truth then what the examiners of this test think. Everyone sees things in different ways. This could be seen as creativity or many other different things. If everyone saw things the same way then that would probably mean that we all think the exact same way and we know that is not the truth. I great example of this is when we look into the sky and try to make things out of the shapes of the clouds. It is easy to try to make obscene arguments that something looks like another object, but it doesn't have anything to do with the person's personality.
(1) http://www.economist.com/node/21538076
Leave a comment