This document outlines several projective techniques used in psychology, including their objectives, characteristics, uses, and administration. It describes the projective hypothesis and discusses the Rorschach inkblot test, Thematic Apperception Test, sentence completion tests, and human figure drawings. For each technique, it covers the materials, administration, scoring systems, evaluations of reliability and validity, and variations or developments of the approach. The document aims to provide an overview of major projective techniques used in clinical assessment and research.

1. PROJECTIVE
TECHNIQUES

2. Projective Techniques :Objectives
1. Identify major characteristics of projective techniques
2. Describe the projective hypothesis
3. Identify major uses of projective techniques and most
frequently used projective.
4. Outline major features of the Rorschach, including Exner's
Comprehensive System
5. Outline major features of the Thematic Apperception Test
6. Outline major features of sentence completion and human
figure drawing techniques
7. Discuss factors affecting future use of projective techniques

3. General Characteristics of
Projective Techniques
 Major characteristics:
 ambiguous stimulus
 constructed-response format (free-response format)
 The Projective Hypothesis
 If the stimulus for a response is ambiguous, then the
response itself will be determined by the examinee’s
personality dynamics.
 In an ambiguous situation, response will be determined by
personality dynamics
 The response will be formulated in terms of the person’s
desires, fantasies, inclinations, fears, motives and so on.
 The projective test is an ideal way of uncovering deep-seated,
perhaps unconscious, personality characteristics.

4.  The projective test may probe deeply,
 The objective personality test only touches
surface features of the personality.
 NB: Historical (but not necessary) connection
with psychoanalytic approach.

5. Uses of Projective Techniques
 There are two principal uses for projective
techniques:
1. Assessment of individual cases in clinical,
counseling and school psychology.
 All surveys show projectives widely used
 Some possible artifacts in the surveys
 use as an ice-breaker, use in informal way, no formal
scoring, use only part of the stimulus materials, almost
part of a conversation in clinical interview.
1. Research
 The research falls into two major categories:
 Research on the psychometric characteristics of the
projective measures.
 Projective techniques are often used as a criterion
variable.

6. The Eight Widely used Projective
Techniques
 Rorschach Inkblot Test
 Thematic Apperception Test (TAT)
 Children's Apperception Test (CAT)
 Bender Visual-Motor Gestalt Test
 Sentence Completion Tests
 Human Figure Drawings
 House-Tree-Person Test (HTP)
 Kinetic Family Drawing Test (KFD)

7. Indicators for the Use of Projective
Techniques
 There are circumstances that may lead a
psychologist to prefer use of a projective test
to an objective personality test.
 Most projectives do not require reading.
 Projective tests are susceptible to faking (good or
bad).
 Projective techniques allow for development of an
exceptionally broad range of hypotheses about
personality dynamics.

8. More Introduction
 “Indicators” for use
 reading problem
 faking issue
 hypothesis generation
 Forewarning on Administration and Scoring
 informal
 holistic
 formal

9. Rorschach
 Materials -
 10 (roughly) symmetrical blots
 some black-gray-white, some with red, some with
pastels
 Administration and scoring
 several pre-Exner systems; confusing array
 Exner’s Comprehensive System now the “industry
standard”; draws on earlier work

10. Sample Inkblot
(Fig 14-2) Not an original Rorschach

11. Key Concepts, Procedures in
Exner’s Comprehensive System
 Administration
 response phase
 verbatim recording
 inquiry phase
 The protocol and coding

12. Some of the Major Coding Categories
(see Table 14.2)
 Location
 Developmental Quality
 Determinants
 Form Quality
 Content
 Populars

13. Examples of Codes
 Location (see Table 14.3)
 W - whole
 D - common detail
 Dd - unusual detail
 S - Space
 Determinants (see Table 14.4)
 movement (e.g., M, FM)
 color
 etc.

14. A Few More Codes
 Populars
 norm referenced: one-third
 Special Scores (18)
 Mor(bid), Ag(gressive), etc.
 Ratios & percents: lots of them

15. Rorschach:
Reports & Evaluation
 Report
 Sequence of Scores and Structural Summary
 See examples at RIAP website
 Evaluation of the Rorschach
 extraordinary differences of opinion

16. TAT
TAT: Thematic Apperception Test
See Figure 14.3 for sample card
 Notes on use
 very widespread, generally 2nd to Rorschach
 some decline in recent years
 Roots in Murray’s theory of needs, presses

17. TAT: Structure &
Administration
 30 cards with ambiguous pictures
(one blank)
 Cards for subgroups by gender, age
 Tell a story: what happened, will happen,
thoughts and feelings

18. TAT: Variations
 Murray’s original system
 Bellak’s “manual”
 Oral (usual), written response
 CAT, SAT

19. TAT: Evaluation
 Some positive results with well-defined
constructs, e.g., affiliation, aggression
 Most reviews unfavorable
 Big Problem: Lack of agreement on system
for administration and scoring
 Some decline in usage

20. RISB:
Rotter Incomplete Sentences Blank
 NB:Many incomplete sentence tests
 RISB:
 3 forms
 40 incomplete sentences (most 2 words; Table 14.5)
 Simple directions:
 Complete the sentence, express your feelings
 Note comparison with other projectives
 fairly constricted response
 aims for one construct: adjustment/maladjustment

21. RISB
 Scoring
 Each response on 7-point scale
(0 = very well adjusted, 6 = very maladjusted)
 Add item scores = Overall Adjustment Score
 Good scoring guidelines in manual
 Evaluation
 Reliability: internal consistency and short-term good;
longer-term drops
 Validity: for “adjustment” respectable; other variables?
 Basis for cut-off score?

22. Human Figure Drawings
 The confusing plethora of initials:
 HFD, DAP, HTP, KFD
 Frequency of Use
 Very widely used
 Often uncertain exactly what was used
 Scoring: from very informal to very formal

23. Draw-a-Man Test
 Variations in administrative procedures
 Goodenough’s test for intelligence
 Machover’s claims (see Table 14.7)
 DAP: SPED
 Offshoots of the technique
 House-Tree-Person (HTP)
 Kinetic Family Drawing (KFD)

24. HFDs: Evaluation
 Problem of administration and scoring
variations (again)
 For very well-defined constructs and scoring
(as in DAP: SPED) some respectable results
 For less defined situations: generally poor

25. Future of Projectives
 Place in training
 Influence of managed care
 Move to objective administration, scoring