Timeline for Is the Rorschach test a reliable diagnostic tool for psychologists?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
19 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 27, 2012 at 12:29 | answer | added | Martin Scharrer | timeline score: 2 | |
| Jan 6, 2012 at 21:50 | comment | added | Chad | @Sklivvz - My problem is still that there is no claim that Rorschach's is a diagnostic test. The claim is it can "detect underlying thought disorder" there are many "thought disorders" - "Thought disorder" is a general term used to describe any of several illnesses or disease processes and there is no claim that the Rorschach's can determine which you have or that you do or do not have them. Just that they have been used to detect them. You need to find a claim that says they are a reliable detection tool. I am sure there is one. | |
| Jan 5, 2012 at 13:35 | comment | added | Sklivvz | @Oddthinking I would accept that. However there's a clear claim that it is "pseudo science". It is most definitely not so for BMI, pulse rate, etc. | |
| Jan 5, 2012 at 12:19 | comment | added | Oddthinking♦ | I suspect (no evidence nor expertise, or I would post it) that the real answer isn't Yes/No, e.g. "It isn't a particularly powerful test; it has poor specificity and sensitivity to any particular condition. However, it has has been used in a lot of published experiments for a lot of different subgroups, and thus can act as a better baseline than anything else we can easily apply. See also: BMI, pulse rate, etc." | |
| Jan 5, 2012 at 12:13 | comment | added | Oddthinking♦ | @Sklivvz: Re: link. Strange. It is working for me. It is just a page giving a brief overview of the publication details of "The Rorschach: A comprehensive system (4th ed.). Basic foundations and principles of interpretation." by John E. Exner Jr. | |
| Jan 5, 2012 at 11:44 | comment | added | Sklivvz | @Oddthinking Your link is not working for me. Based on your reasoning we should close half the questions here ("Is there enough proof for evolution" has many books written on it, "Does stress affect the immune system" has a whole field of study answering that...) The fact that you could write a book on the subject, doesn't mean you need a book to answer the question. This is a yes/no answer | |
| Jan 5, 2012 at 2:31 | comment | added | Oddthinking♦ | One of the rules for the scope of questions on StackExchange is that if you can imagine a whole book on the subject, the scope is too large. Here's a book on the subject... Should we close the question? | |
| Jan 4, 2012 at 22:09 | comment | added | Sklivvz | @DenysYeo I've converted to a comment. In reply: a reliable test is a test that produces a correct diagnosis with little margin for error under double blind conditions. | |
| Jan 4, 2012 at 22:04 | comment | added | Denys Yeo | Good question but you need to be a little more careful with your terminology. A reliable test is one that will produce similar results each time it is administered. For example, with the Rorschach does a person who states this week that a blot reminds him of his breakfast make a similar statement about the same blot a month later? With regards to your question, I think that you are asking, is the test valid for the purpose it is used for. For example, if the Rorschach Test is supposed to be able to discriminate between various mental disorders is there evidence that it can do this? Rel | |
| Jan 4, 2012 at 18:48 | comment | added | Chad | The claim is not that it is, just that it has been used to detect an underlying thought disorder. That would be a detection tool. A diagnostic tool would be used to determine what the problem actually once once the problem has been detected. Its like a tire pressure sensor it can say you have a problem with your tire but not determine that you have a nail in it. | |
| Jan 4, 2012 at 18:31 | comment | added | Sklivvz | @Chad I don't know whether it is a valid/reliable diagnostic tool or not (there are two cross-claims here, that it is and that it isn't). I am certain that it can't be both ;-) | |
| Jan 4, 2012 at 18:28 | comment | added | Chad | the claim is "It has been employed to detect underlying thought disorder" - you are skeptical of that? | |
| Jan 4, 2012 at 18:24 | comment | added | Sklivvz | @Chad: the claim is in the first quote from wikipedia. It is used by some psychologists to "detect underlying thought disorder". If you care to read the wikipedia page you will find all the info you want that will show you that it's not a mere conversation starter... | |
| Jan 4, 2012 at 16:12 | comment | added | Chad | I do not see how it can be considered a scientifically reliable diagnostic tool when the results are subjective and can be influenced drastically by the test proctor. But that assumes it is meant to be a diagnostic tool rather than a tool to prompt discussion. I think the question needs to be updated to include a claim that it is a diagnostic tool and what can be diagnosed. The only thing that can reasonably be inferred from what we have here is that it is a tool used by psychologists to make a diagnosis not that it is a diagnostic tool by itself. | |
| Jan 4, 2012 at 2:26 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackSkeptic/status/154388116441010176 | ||
| Jan 4, 2012 at 0:23 | comment | added | Sklivvz | @MarkRogers possibly. However the claim i am skeptical of is that they are a valid test, not a valid conversation starter :-) | |
| Jan 3, 2012 at 21:22 | comment | added | Mark Rogers | I'm betting that the Rorschach test has some value as a conversation starter to get patients talking about the things that are bothering them, who would otherwise has trouble expressing their problems in a standard conversation. | |
| Jan 3, 2012 at 21:05 | comment | added | user5341 | Obligatory Youtube clip of Rockhound and others from "Armageddon" being tested. youtube.com/watch?v=INLo0Zr0_lA&feature=related (starting with 2:00 mark) | |
| Jan 3, 2012 at 20:22 | history | asked | Sklivvz | CC BY-SA 3.0 |