A Picture Is Worth A Thousand Words
Many students know of the classic Rorschach Inkblot test, you know… the one with the weird blobs! This indeed is a fascinating type of test unlike a typical achievement or aptitude test, which are performed quite frequently by the average student. However, beyond the popular inkblot test lies as array of tests similar to this projective process, for instance, that of the, “Thematic Apperception Test,” created in the 1930s. Both the Rorschach and the TAT are categorized as “projective personality tests”, which are described as tests that present ambiguous material possible of eliciting an unlimited range of responses. However, in the case of TAT, within these responses we are specifically looking for one thing.
This projective test assesses one’s motives, which in other terms simply means that it is looking for what a person might be striving for. The processes involved in the TAT are firstly giving participants ambiguous images of people or situations. Then, the participant is asked to tell a story from these ambiguous images. As stated by creator Henry Murray, “The stories expose the underlying inhibited tendencies which the subject is not willing to admit or cannot admit because he is unconscious of them… The subject leaves the test happily unaware that he has presented the psychologist with what accounts to an x-ray picture of his inner self,” (SOURCE). Thus, he reveals that this form of testing is both projective and implicit.
The four types of motives that are searched for via such tests are:
1) Achievement — a recurrent aspiration for experiences of success. (Schönbrodta, 2012)
2) Power — a recurrent preference for having influence and impact over other’s attitudes, emotions or behaviours. (Schönbrodta, 2012)
3) Intimacy — a recurrent preference to experience situations of closeness, interaction and warmth. Goal of remaining close with individuals. (Schönbrodta, 2012)
4) Affiliation — a recurrent preference for establishing relationships with others and maintaining them. (Schönbrodta, 2012)
Whenever I see such subjective tests, I worry about its validity due to potential biases and ranges of potential results. However, David McClelland, has worked to avoid such issues by instating an appropriate coding system (Ex: Exactly what story components constitute affiliation) allowing for more objectivity in scoring.
So as we see in the case of the Rorchach and the TAT, it truly is the case that an image, as ambiguous as it may be, it worth a thousand words, and useful words on the part of psychologists!
SOURCES:
Schonbrodt, F. (2012). An IRT Analysis of Motive Questionnaires: The Unified Motive Scales. Journal of Research in Personality. Retrieved from: http://www.psy.lmu.de/allg2/download/schoenbrodt/pub/ums_jrp.pdf
