Get complete information on Assessment through Projective Techniques

The psychoanalytic approach to understanding an individual’s personality requires finding out about his unconscious conflicts and motives. Since, a large part of the personality is unconscious, the person cannot tell you about it. The psychoanalyst must interpret the symbolic meanings of the person’s behavior to arrive at the underlying motives. Projective tests have been devised as one method for uncovering unconscious motives.

A projective test presents an ambiguous stimulus to which the individual may respond as he wishes. Theoretically, because, the stimulus is ambiguous and does not demand a specific response, the individual projects his personality through his responses, just as a movie camera projects an image on the screen. Projective tests tap the subject’s imagination, and through his imaginative productions it is assumed that he reveals somethirg about himself. Two of the most widely used projective techniques are the Rorschach Test and the Thematic Apperception Test.

1. Rorschach:

The Rorschach Test, developed by the Swiss psychiatrist Hermann Rorshach in the 1920s, consists of a series of 10 cards, each displaying a rather complex, inkblot. Some of the blots are colored and some are in black and white. The subject is instructed to look at the inkblots one at a time and report everything seen on the card-everything the inkblot could look like or resemble. After the subject has finished the 10 cards, the examiner usually, goes back over each response, asking the subject to elaborate some responses and to tell what features of the blot gave a particular impression.

The subject’s responses may be scored in terms of three categories: (1) location-does the response involve the entire inkblot or some small part; (2) determinants-is the subject responding to the shape of the blot, the color, or differences in texture and shading; (3) content-what does the response represent. Contrary to what most people think, content is considered the least important in revealing personality dynamics, except in certain fairly pathological cases.

Several elaborate scoring systems have been devised that take all three categories into consideration. But, because, these systems have not proved to have much predictive value, most psychologists base their interpretations on an impressionistic evaluation of the response record as well as the subject’s general reaction to the test situation: for example, is the individual defensive, open, competitive, cooperative and so on.

2. Thematic Apperception Test:

Another popular projective test is the Thematic Apperception Test (abbreviated TAT) developed at Harvard University by Henry Murary during the 1930s. This test is less ambiguous than the Rorschach because it involves pictures, similar to that in Figure, and asked to make up a story about each. He or she is encouraged to give free region to imagination and to tell whatever story comes to mind.

The test is intended to reveal the basic “themes” that recur in a person’s imaginative productions. Apperception means a readiness to perceive in certain ways, based on prior individual experience.

Hence, the test’s name implies that people interpret ambiguous pictures according to their individual readiness to perceive, and that they elaborate stories in terms of preferrfcd plots or themes that reflect personal fantasies. In taking the TAT; the subject tells stories about 20 pictures. If particular problems are bothering the subject, they may show up in a number of the stories.

In analyzing responses to the TAT cards the psychologist looks for recurrent themes that may reveal the individual’s needs, motives; or characteristic way of handling interpersonal relations.

Behavioral Measurement:

Behavior can be observed directly in naturalistic settings. Children can be observed in a nursery school setting, and notes made on the number of aggressive responses displayed and the particular conditions that elicited the responses. A device has been developed to permit an observer to record categories of behavior automatically.

A panel of buttons, each of which represents a category of behavior (e.g., talking, running, sitting, alone), is attached to a recorder pen. By depressing the button whenever the child starts the behavior designated by that button and not releasing the button until that particular behavior is discontinued, an observer can obtain a continuous record of behavior.

This apparatus has been used to study the behavior of disturbed children in an effort to determine the environmental conditions that elicit and maintain certain maladaptive behavior (Lovaas and others, 1965).

The strength of certain avoidance behaviors has been assessed by exposing the fearful individual to a series of real or symbolic fear-inducing stimuli. The strength of fear or heights can be measured by noting how far the individual will climb up a ladder; fear of snakes has been measured by noting how closely the individual will approach a live but, harmless snake-from simply looking at the snake in a glass cage to actually allowing the animal to crawl over one’s body. This kind of direct behavior sampling is often used to measure strength of fear before and after receiving therapy aimed a relieving specific fear.

When it is not possible for the assessor to observe behavior directly, self-reports may be used. For example, a person might be given a list of situations that arouse anxiety and asked to rank the most disturbing ones. Or a subject might be asked to keep a daily log noting activities and the conditions under which certain anxieties or behaviors occurs.

In one case a woman who suffered from severe asthma attacks was asked to keep a diary for 85 days including all her activities and detailed descriptions of any respiratory or other physical symptoms- what the symptoms were and under exactly what conditions they occurred. Subsequent analysis of the diary revealed that more than half of her acute Asthma attacks occurred following contact with her mother.

Physical activity and other sources of stress, such as interviews, did not elicit attacks. Moreover, most of the days in which she was completely free of respiratory symptoms involved no contact with her mother (Metcalfe, 1956). This is an example of a procedure that can be used as the first step in identifying problem-producing stimuli.