In chapter 16 of the textbook there is a section that talks about projective tests. A projective test is one that asks the subjects to examine or interpret various ambiguous stimuli. One of these tests is the Rorschach Inkblot Test. This was developed by Hermann Rorschach in the 1920's. It was a simple yes consisting of 10 different inkblots and all you had to do is tell the examiner what you say in the inkblots. The results of these tests widely varied and depending on how you interpreted the inkblots, you could be deemed obsessive compulsive, narcissistic, emotional, and so on. One thing that this test was greatly scrutinized for was for its lack of evidence for incremental validity. Incremental validity is the extent to which a test contributes information beyond other, more easily collected, measures (Lilienfeld, et al. pg. 571). The test itself takes approximately 45 minus and about twice as long to inexpert, so wouldn't it be easier and more time efficient to use another method to get the same answers?
I think that this would be a very interesting test to take because I don't think that by saying what you see in an image can determine you psychological makeup. The results of these tests were ver controversial and I agree with that. Also, the test-retest reliabilities were unknown and often problematic. So does this really work as an effective psychological analysis?