This document provides an overview of the Rorschach inkblot personality assessment test. It discusses the test's history, development by Hermann Rorschach in the 1920s. While initially popular, the test's validity and reliability have been questioned due to lack of standardization and poor correlations with other personality measures. The document examines criticisms of the test and its use internationally, concluding it should be used as a supplement to more empirically validated assessments.

1. Running Head: RORSCHACH INKBLOT PERSONALITY ASSESMENTS 1
An Analysis of Rorschach Inkblot Personality Assessment Tests
Erika Lal
Azusa Pacific University
July 6, 2011
© 2011

2. RORSCHACH INKBLOT PERSONALITY ASSESSMENTS 2
An Analysis of Rorschach Inkblot Personality Assessment Tests
While many personality assessment tests today consist of interviews and lengthy surveys,
there was once a period where projective techniques dominated the psychological study of
personality. In order to break away from the study of traits, projective tests such as the
Rorschach inkblot tests were thought to give insight into the holistic self at a deeper level (Hertz,
1992, p. 168). As the inkblots became a popular method of assessment, controversy in its validity
and scoring methods began to stir. Despite its doubters, the Rorschach test began to spread
worldwide as countries adapted the test to their individual cultures. Many psychology
associations still feel the need for students and therapists to understand the Rorschach test and
encourage training for its code scoring. In looking further into these famous inkblot tests, one
will discover that although this method of assessment still carries significance in understanding
personality for some psychologists, it should not be solely relied on as an assessor.
History and Development
The Rorschach inkblot personality test was developed in the early 1920s by Hermann
Rorschach. The test was derived from the children’s game of Blotto, also known as
Klecksographie, which used word and story associations from ink images blotted onto cards
(Framingham, 2011, p.1). Once Rorschach took an interest in hallucinations and schizophrenic
patients, their responses to the game intrigued Rorschach to study the blots further. Using a set of
cards containing black-and-white or colored blots of ink, the patient is asked to describe an
image they see in the blot. Their responses are then scored according to a coding system which
Rorschach developed. This system “reveal[ed] modes of perception and their relation to
personality and psychopathology”, according to Marguerite Hertz who devoted much of her
study to the Rorschach method (Hertz, 1992, p. 168). Although Hermann Rorschach did not

3. RORSCHACH INKBLOT PERSONALITY ASSESSMENTS 3
consider this personality assessment as a projective method in his 1921 publication
Psychodiagnostik, later followers of this test considered it so. They see it as a significant test
because “its scores may tap more unconscious or implicit processes relevant to psychopathy
(e.g., self-concept, unconscious drives)” (Wood, Lilienfeld, Nezworski, Garb, Allen &
Wildermuth, 2010, p. 336).
Rorschach’s study of inkblot assessments were continued by John Exner in the 1960s. He
published a report claiming high significance between the responses of psychopaths who were
given the Rorschach inkblot test, which he “interpreted as indicative of underlying narcissism”
(Wood, et al., 2010, p. 336). He developed a better organized coding system for responses of the
Rorschach known as Exner’s Comprehensive System. After his translation of Rorschach’s codes,
the Rorschach Research Exchange was established to further understand the personality
responses of the inkblots, to train psychologists to administer and read the scoring, and to update
its measurement and methods (Hertz, 1992, p. 168). Since then, many supporters have continued
to test its methods for therapy, forensic study, prison inmates, and graduate trainees studying
psychopathology (Wood, et al., 2010, p. 336).
Benefits and Drawbacks
The Rorschach inkblot test is known as a tool that distinguishes between personalities of
nonpsychopathic and psychopathic personalities. Criminal behaviors and anti-social behaviorism
seem to produce similar categorizations of the Rorschach structure. Although the Rorschach
inkblots became a highly popular form of personality and cognitive ability test in the 1960s,
there also rose some controversy with its method of validity and reliability. The score coding
from the test results were meant to confidently predict psychological pathologies and behavior
for patients with psychiatric disorders. However, there are numerous problems with the test that

4. RORSCHACH INKBLOT PERSONALITY ASSESSMENTS 4
prohibit an overall personality assessment from being correctly determined. One such issue was
the lack of standardization for the test. Since the test is “subjective and indefinite”, with differing
administers, criteria and scoring, the norms are inadequate (Hertz, 1936, p. 237). Therefore
different ages of test-takers, different test proctors, different personalities, and different
conditions of the test (attitude of the administer, variations in instructions, conversation
accompanying test, etc.) will all provide different results. Its reliability is low since there is a
lack of consistency in its results. How can a test be standardized to determine levels of
personality when it never receives consistent responses?
Another problem with the Rorschach inkblots is found when measuring its validity.
While some of its validity was redeemed through the Rorschach Research Exchange, Exner’s
Comprehensive System, and research performed by other psychologists to create standards in its
methods and coding, there are still many factors which come to question. A study done by
Dragana Djurić Jočić and Jean-Michel Petot point out one of the most important arguments about
Rorschach:
…[T]he Rorschach scores and ratios have only poor or no correlations with the
dimensions assessed by recognized inventories of personality, the psychometric
properties of which are well established (Djurić Jočić & Petot, 2005, p. 7).
Their study sought to distinguish Rorschach’s results in comparison to the Five Factor model of
personality. When the patients’ results are elusive and do not always fall under one of Schacter’s
five personality types, the validity of the test is compromised.
Donald Viglione Jr. researched Hermann Rorschach’s inkblot test methods further to
discover a long list of problems. His thirty-seven issues consisted of factors ranging in

5. RORSCHACH INKBLOT PERSONALITY ASSESSMENTS 5
Rorschach’s theoretical claims to the actual procedure and interpretation (Viglione, 1997, p.591).
The chart below lists only a few examples of the issues from his list:
Planning & Design: Procedural: Interpretive:
-Lack of appropriate control groups -Fail to control variables -Overgeneralization of
-Uses test to validate itself -Experimenter bias findings
-Vague hypothesis -Fail to recognize skew -Implicit hypotheses
-No discriminant validity & outliers not specified
-Post hoc findings presented as a priori -Fail to consider statistical -Confusion of statistic
assumptions significance
His list points out some very reasonable arguments relating to the validity, reliability, hypothesis,
testing methodology, and interpretation of responses. His study also determines solutions for the
Rorschach issues such as knowing your data, having independent validity criteria, and ruling out
other rival hypotheses would “solidify the empirical foundations of the test” (Viglione, 1997, p.
598). Gregory Myer confirms Viglione’s conclusion about the test, and also addresses
Rorschach’s construct and face validity as a problem. Since the construct of the scores are
unknown until after the test is taken, the empirical landmarks are discreet, causing the
administrator to base scores on their own inferences (Meyer, 1996, p.602). The intensive training
needed for any test administrator to find accurate results is also an issue presented by Meyer. The
guidelines need uniformity across psychology journals and publications.
Rorschach International
The development of the Rorschach inkblot tests in the United States has expanded into
international borders. The United Kingdom, Japan, and Turkey are now using Rorschach’s test to
determine personalities of eneuretic children, PTSD patients, and other interpersonal problems.
Psychologists and psychiatrists are being trained to understand the methodology and score
coding for administering the test to their patients. A study performed by Greg Meyer on possible
ethnic differences encountered in the Rorschach test resulted with no differences in validity,

6. RORSCHACH INKBLOT PERSONALITY ASSESSMENTS 6
slope bias, intercept bias, or other relevant factors (Meyer, 2002, p.104). While certain behaviors
are not universal across cultural differences, the Rorschach is still being encouraged as a footing
for understanding personality.
The United Kingdom was first introduced to the Rorschach test back in 1933. It was seen
“to open up new possibilities in the area of psychodiagnostics for helping to provide a better
understanding of personality” (Woods, 2008, p.64). Theodora Alcock was essential in
encouraging the Tavistock Clinic in London to use its methods in their clinical practices. She
began to master the different aspects of the test and its scoring, according to Dr. Eric Twist. In
the United Kingdom, the Rorschach had similar uses to that of the United States. It was part of
the process for screening potential psychopathic patients, as well as in forensic studies (Woods,
2008, p. 67). It seems as though there would not be any cultural misinterpretations for the
Rorschach in this country, and since many psychologists are receiving training in the United
States, there is a tighter conjunction between the two countries’ assessments.
Japan learned of the Rorschach inkblot method before the United Kingdom when
psychologist Yuzaburo Uchida found a copy of Rorschach’s Psychodiagnostik in 1925 (Sorai &
Ohnuki, 2008, p.38). Uchida used the inkblots with psychotic patients, high school students
simultaneously with Emile Kraepeline’s Die Arbeitscurve, or the Mental Work Curve method.
Both of these methods have created a cultural mentality in Japan for increasing one’s aptitude,
drive, and work constancy. “Today in Japan, there are between 800,000 to 1 million Japanese in
various fields, subject to this special test” (Sorai & Ohnuki, 2008, p. 38). Extracting concepts
from both tests, Uchida’s psychodiagnostics are adapted to Japan’s culture. The universities in
Japan have further researched Rorschach’s original theory to incorporate a unique structure and
the development of a journal crucial for psychopathogists.

7. RORSCHACH INKBLOT PERSONALITY ASSESSMENTS 7
The Rorschach test is perceived as “the radiography of human spirit” in Turkey (İkiz,
2011, p.72). Its development by Yani Anastasiadis in 1943 presented numerous opportunities for
psychological testing in Turkey’s mental hospitals. Anastasiadis claims the Rorschach was
helpful in showing brain dysfunctions amongst his patients (Ikiz, 2011, p.73) Unlike Japan,
however, the introduction of the Rorschach method was not as well appreciate in Turkey. Since
experimental psychology uses statistical valued results, and was the dominating method at the
time, Rorschach’s inferential inkblots did not seem to fit suite. As universities and other
clinicians became confronted more often by Anastasiadis with the Rorschach assessment, the
projective method began to adapt into Turkish culture. Although rejected at first, its
incorporation of cultural and social norms have encouraged its study in Turkish universities still
today.
Conclusion
The problems confronted in the Rorschach test are ones which cannot be overlooked
when assessing personalities for therapeutic purposes. Although Hermann Rorschach’s original
intention was not for inkblots to be a projective test, the succeeding psychologists have deemed
its position as such. The reliability and validity of a test assessing one’s personality are extremely
significant. Since this test is used to determine psychopathologic behaviors, any
misinterpretations or testing variables can substantially alter results. “Because face validity
influences attitudes and evaluations of a test's acceptability, to some extent the Rorschach's
limitations may be afforded less tolerance than the limitations inherent in other tests” (Meyer &
Archer, 2001). While other personality tests that are empirically based may have room for some
validity issues, the inferential structure of the Rorschach inkblots cannot provide alternatives.

8. RORSCHACH INKBLOT PERSONALITY ASSESSMENTS 8
Some psychologists in the past have claimed the Rorschach to be very important [in]
highlight[ing] changes and underlin[ing] the importance of reading its findings in a general view
of personality dynamics (di Riso, Salcuni, Laghezza, Marogna, & Lis, 2009, p. 179). I would
argue the need for this test method to be used as a supplement to more empirically-based
assessments. When used in accordance with other tests, it can assist in the facilitation of self-
expression for patients with potential psychopathological behaviors ((Djurić Jočić & Petot, 2005,
p. 7). The test can encourage engagement of clinical therapy and an examination of the self for
patients. However, to base all personality assessments solely on the foundations of the
Rorschach’s unstable and invalid scoring codes would be to jeopardize the diagnoses of patients
worldwide.

9. RORSCHACH INKBLOT PERSONALITY ASSESSMENTS 9
REFERENCES
di Riso, D., Salcuni, S., Laghezza, L., Marogna C., & Lis A. (2009) Assessing changes in
psychoanalytic psychodynamic therapy with an early adolescent. Rorschachiana, 30,
150-179). Retrieved from http://0web.ebscohost.com.patris.apu.edu/ehost /detail?sid=
9a1f6eef-f7c6-4713-86c7bbaa0bee423b%40sessionmgr111&vid =1&hid=126&bdata
=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=pdh&AN=ror-30-2-150
Djurić Jočić, D. & Petot, J.M. (2005). Introduction to the special section on the
Rorschach and the Five-Factor Theory. Rorschachiana, 27, 7-10 . Retrieved from
http://0-web.ebscohost.com.patris.apu.edu/ehost/detail?sid=ace173f4-2f67-4c66-a259-
133786115554%40sessionmgr110&vid=1&hid=126&bdata=JnNpdGU9Z
Whvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=pdh&AN=ror-27-1-7
Exner, J. E. Jr. (1980). But it’s only an inkblot. Journal of Personality Assessment, 44,
563. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16366912
Framingham, J. (2011). Rorschach Inkblot Test. Psych Central. Retrieved from
http://psychcentral.com/lib/2011/rorschach-inkblot-test/
Gronnerd, C. & Hartmann, E. (2010). Moving Rorschach scoring forward: The RN-Rorschach
scoring system as an exemplar of simplified scoring. Rorschachiana, 31, 22-42.
Retrieved from http://0-web.ebscohost.com.patris.apu.edu/ehost/detail?sid=d9700280-
8cc6-441f-978d-e697934f06a4%40sessionmgr112&vid=1&hid=126&bdata=JnNpdGU9
ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=pdh&AN=ror-31-1-22
Hertz, M. R. (1936). The method of administration of the Rorschach ink-blot test. Child
Development, 7, 237-254. Retrieved from http://0-www.jstor.org.patris.apu.edu/
stable/1125576?&Search=yes&searchText=history&searchText=rorschach&list=hide&se

10. RORSCHACH INKBLOT PERSONALITY ASSESSMENTS 10
archUri=%2Faction%2FdoAdvancedSearch%3Fq0%3Dhistory%2Bof%2Brorschach%26
f0%3Dall%26c1%3DAND%26q1%3D%26f1%3Dall%26acc%3Don%26wc%3Don%26
Search%3DSearch%26sd%3D%26ed%3D%26la%3D%26jo%3D%26dc.Psychology%3
DPsychology&prevSearch=&item=1&ttl=147&returnArticleService=showFullText
Hertz, M. R. (1992). Rorschachbound: A 50-year memoir. Professional Psychology: Research
and Practice, 23, 168-171. Retrieved from http://0-web.ebscohost.com.patris.apu.edu/e
host/detail?sid=a1032e0d-7755-4f7f-922f-c026ee76b209%40sessionmgr104&vid=1&hid
=126&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=pdh&AN=pro-23-3-168
İkiz, T. (2011). The history and development of the Rorschach test in Turkey. Rorschachiana,
32, 72-90. Retrieved from http://0-web.ebscohost.com.patris.apu.edu/ehost/detail?sid
=8adc22ed-e91b-443c-860e-becc70ba11b5%40sessionmgr110&vid=1&hid=126&bdata
=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=pdh&AN=ror-32-1-72
Meloy, J. R. (2005). Some reflections on What’s wrong with the Rorschach?. Journal of
Personality Assessment, 85, 344-346. Retrieved from http://0web.ebscohost.com.
patris.apu .edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=f1aff6dc-554e-4fc1-b2bde98832
797ea3%40sessionmgr10&vid=1&hid=7
Meyer, G. J. (1996). Construct Validation of scales derived from the Rorschach method:
a review of issues and introduction to the Rorschach rating scale. Journal of Personality
Assessment, 67, 598-628. Retrieved from http://0web.ebscohost.com. patris.
apu.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=cda206fa-151b-4030-93abe07021
986f83%40sessionmgr12&vid=1&hid=7
Meyer, G. J. (2002). Exploring possible ethnic differences and bias in the Rorschach

11. RORSCHACH INKBLOT PERSONALITY ASSESSMENTS 11
comprehensive system. Journal of Personality Assessment, 78, 104-129. Retrieved from
http://0-web.ebscohost.com.patris.apu.edu/ehost/detail?sid=796e 7f3d-954f-47be-8175-
a70921104af9%40sessionmgr15&vid=1&hid=7&bdata=
JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=aph&AN=6153993
Meyer, G. J. & Archer, R. P. (2001). The hard science of Rorschach research: what do we
know and where do we go?. Psychological Assessment, 13, 486-502. Retrieved from
http://0-web.ebscohost.com.patris.apu.edu/ehost/detail?sid=cbb557d0-d39f-4362-
a627da70c258260d%40sessionmgr15&vid=1&hid=7&bdata=JnNpdGU9Z Whv
c3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=aph&AN=5815152
Sorai, K. & Ohnuki, K. (2008). The development of the Rorschach in Japan. Rorschachiana, 29,
38-63. Retrieved from http://0-web.ebscohost.com.patris.apu.edu/ehost/detail?sid=
af406895-e2e4-45ba-b29b-516567e406b3%40sessionmgr114&vid=1&hid=126&b
data=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=pdh&AN=ror-29-1-38
Viglione, D. J. Jr. (1997). Problems in Rorschach research and what to do about them.
Journal of Personality Assessment, 68, 590-599. Retrieved from http://0web.ebs
cohost.com.patris.apu.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=f5662c72-698e-4911-99da-
9410b1ac35fe%40sessionmgr14&vid=1&hid=7
Wood, J.M., Lilienfeld, S.O., Nezworski, M.T., Garb, H.N., Allen, K.H., & Wildermuth,
J.L. (2010) Validity of Rorschach Inkblot scores for discriminating psychopaths from
nonpsychopaths in forensic populations: A meta-analysis. Psychological Assessment, 22,
336-349. Retrieved from http://0-web.ebscohost.com.patris.
apu.edu/ehost/detail?sid=ba759c91-7b85-4d1f-bd80-73d2b7fde79a%40session

12. RORSCHACH INKBLOT PERSONALITY ASSESSMENTS 12
mgr14&vid=1&hid=7&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=pdh&AN=pa
s-22-2-336
Woods, J.M. (2008). The history of the Rorschach in the United Kingdom. Rorschachiana, 29,
64-80. Retrieved from http://0-web.ebscohost.com.patris.apu.edu/ehost/detail?sid=
e268090f-f657-471c-ad39-3b76f1e284c6%40sessionmgr104&vid=1&hid=126&bdata=
JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=pdh&AN=ror-29-1-64