Skip to main content
Search
Search
    Quick Search anywhere
    Quick search in Citations
Advanced Search
Skip main navigationClose Drawer MenuOpen Drawer Menu
Previous article
Next article
Special Section: The Rorschach and the Five-Factor Theory

A Five-Factor Theory Perspective on the Rorschach

Published Online:March 06, 2008https://doi.org/10.1027/1192-5604.27.1.80

Abstract

Many of the constructs the Rorschach is used to assess are related to personality traits included in the Five-Factor Model, but studies to date have not shown convergence between Rorschach and self-report measures of these traits. This poses a problem for the Rorschach, because recent research on the universality, stability, heritability, and consensual validity of traits demonstrate that self-report measures cannot be dismissed. In an effort to understand these issues, we examine the Rorschach from the perspective of Five-Factor Theory (FFT), a systems model of the person. FFT is compatible with the projective hypothesis, but would generally lead to the expectation that Rorschach signs and self-reports should be correlated. Where they are not, the validity of Rorschach measures of personality traits would need to be confirmed by demonstrations of their heritability, stability, and convergence with observer ratings. The Rorschach may be more useful when interpreted in the context of a global psychodynamic assessment. Clinicians who use the Rorschach should gather the data necessary to test its validity as a measure of personality traits and related constructs, and clinicians and researchers should consider the possible use of Rorschach responses in assessing dynamic processes.


Beaucoup de dimensions pour l’évaluation desquelles on utilise le Rorschach sont liées aux traits de personnalité retenus dans le modèle des cinq facteurs, mais les études n’ont montré à ce jour aucune convergence entre le Rorschach et la mesure de ces traits par l’auto-évaluation. Cela pose un problème pour le Rorschach, parce que les travaux récents sur l’universalité, la stabilité, l’héritabilité et la validité consensuelle de ces traits démontrent qu’on ne peut pas disqualifier les mesures fondées sur l’auto-évaluation. Dans un effort pour éclairer cette question, nous examinons le Rorschach du point de vue de la théorie des cinq facteurs. La théorie des cinq facteurs est compatible avec l’hypothèse projective, mais devrait conduire dans l’ensemble à attendre que les signes au Rorschach et l’auto-évaluation soient corrélés. Quand ils ne le sont pas, la validité des évaluations de traits de personnalité par le Rorschach devrait être confirmée par la démonstration de leur héritabilité, de leur stabilité et de leur convergence avec les évaluations faites par des observateurs. Le Rorschach est peut-être plus utile quand on l’interprète dans le contexte d’une évaluation psychodynamique globale. Les cliniciens qui utilisent le Rorschach devraient recueillir les données nécessaires pour tester sa validité en tant que mesure de traits de personnalité et de réalités du même ordre, et les cliniciens et les chercheurs devraient prendre en considération la possibilité d’utiliser les réponses au Rorschach dans l’évaluation des processus dynamiques.


Muchos de los constructos teóricos que se usan en la evaluación con Rorschach se relacionan con rasgos de personalidad incluidos en el modelo de los Cinco Factores, pero hasta el momento no se ha podido demostrar una convergencia significativa entre Rorschach y medidas de autoinformes para valorar esos rasgos. Esto plantea un problema para el Rorschach, porque las más recientes investigaciones sobre la universalidad, estabilidad, herencia y validez consensual de dichos rasgos señalan que las medidas procedentes de los autoinformes no pueden ser ignoradas. Intentando comprender mejor estos aspectos, examinamos el Rorschach desde la perspectiva de la teoría de los Cinco Factores (Five-Factor Theory: FFT), un modelo sistémico de la persona. La FFT es compatible con la hipótesis proyectiva pero implica la expectativa de que los signos Rorschach y los datos de los autoinformes deberían correlacionar. Cuando no ocurre así, la validez de las medidas Rorschach sobre rasgos de personalidad debería ser confirmada mediante pruebas de heredabilidad, estabilidad y convergencia de las puntuaciones de observadores. El Rorschach podría ser más útil si se interpretara en el contexto de una evaluación psicodinámica global. Los clínicos que usan el Rorschach tendrían que recopilar los datos necesarios para probar su validez como medida de rasgos de personalidad y constructos relacionados. Tanto clínicos como investigadores deberían considerar la posible utilidad de las respuestas al Rorschach para evaluar procesos dinámicos.

References

  • Archer, R.P. (1996). MMPI-Rorschach interrelationships: Proposed criteria for evaluating explanatory models. Journal of Personality Assessment, 67, 504–515. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Archer, R.P. , Newsom, C.R. (2000). Psychological test usage with adolescent clients: Survey update. Assessment, 73, 227–235. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Bagby, R.M. , Rector, N.A. , Bindseil, K. , Dickens, S.E. , Levitan, R.D. , Kennedy, S.H. (1998). Self-report ratings and informant ratings of personalities of depressed outpatients. American Journal of Psychiatry, 155, 437–438. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Behrends, R.S. , & Blatt, S.J. (2003). Psychodynamic assessment. In J.S. Wiggins, , Paradigms of personality assessment. New York: Guilford. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Blatt, S.J. (1990). The Rorschach: A test of perception or an evaluation of representation. Journal of Personality Assessment, 55, 394–416. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Bouchard, T.J. , & Loehlin, J.C. (2001). Genes, evolution, and personality. Behavior Genetics, 31, 243–273. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Conn, S.R. , Rieke, M.L. (Eds.) (1994). 16PF Fifth Edition technical manual. Champaign, IL: Institute for Personality and Ability Testing. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Costa, P.T., Jr. , Busch, C.M. , Zonderman, A.B. , McCrae, R.R. (1986). Correlations of MMPI factor scales with measures of the Five-Factor Model of personality. Journal of Personality Assessment, 50, 640–650. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Costa, P.T., Jr. , McCrae, R.R. (1986). Age, personality, and the Holtzman Inkblot Technique. International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 23, 115–112. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Costa, P.T., Jr. , McCrae, R.R. (1992a). Normal personality assessment in clinical practice: The NEO Personality Inventory. Psychological Assessment, 4, 5–13–20–22. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Costa, P.T., Jr. , McCrae, R.R. (1992b). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Costa, P.T., Jr. , McCrae, R.R. (1995). Solid ground in the wetlands of personality: A reply to Block. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 216–220. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Costa, P.T., Jr. , McCrae, R.R. , Dye, D.A. (1991). Facet scales for agreeableness and conscientiousness: A revision of the NEO Personality Inventory. Personality and Individual Differences, 12, 887–898. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Costa, P.T., Jr. , Piedmont, R.L. (2003). Revised NEO Personality Inventory profiles of Madeline G. In J.S. Wiggins, , Paradigms of personality assessment. New York: Guilford. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Costa, P.T., Jr. , Terracciano, A. , McCrae, R.R. (2001). Gender differences in personality traits across cultures: Robust and surprising findings. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 322–331. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • De Raad, B. , Perugini, M. Eds. (2002). Big Five assessment. Göttingen, Germany: Hogrefe & Huber. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Epstein, S. (1979). The stability of behavior: I. On predicting most of the people much of the time. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1097–1126. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Exner, J.E. (1993). The Rorschach: A comprehensive system (vol. 1). New York: Wiley. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Funder, D.C. (1989). Accuracy in personality judgment and the dancing bear. In D.M. Buss, N. Cantor, (Eds.), Personality psychology: Recent trends and emerging directions (pp. 210–223. New York: Springer. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Greenwald, D.R. (1990). An external construct validity study of Rorschach personality variables. Journal of Personality Assessment, 55, 768–780. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Greenwald, D.F. (1999). Relationships between the Rorschach and the NEO Five-Factor Inventory. Psychological Reports, 85, 519–527. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Hartmann, E. (1991). Boundaries in the mind: A new psychology of personality differences. New York: Basic Books. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Hathaway, S.R. , & McKinley, J.C. (1983). The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory manual. New York: Psychological Corporation. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Holtzman, W.H. (1961). Guide to administration and scoring: Holtzman Inkblot Technique. New York: Psychological Corporation. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • John, O.P. , Robins, R.W. (1994). Accuracy and bias in self-perception: Individual differences in self-enhancement and the role of narcissism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 206–219. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Jorgensen, K. , Andersen, T.J. , Dam, H. (2000). The diagnostic efficiency of the Rorschach Depression Index and the Schizophrenia Index: A review. Assessment, 7, 259–280. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Kuhn, M.H. , McPartland, T.S. (1954). An empirical investigation of self-attitudes. American Sociological Review, 19, 68–76. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Lilienfeld, S.O. , Wood, J.M. , Garb, H.N. (2000). The scientific status of projective techniques. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 1, 27–66. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Lohrenz, L.J. , & Gardner, R.W. (1967). The Mayman Form-Level scoring method: Scorer reliability and correlates of form level. Journal of Projective Techniques and Personality Assessment, 31, 39–43. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • McAdams, D.P. (1993). The stories we live by: Personal myths and the making of the self. New York: William Morrow. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • McAdams, D.P. , Anyidoho, N.A. , Brown, C. , Huang, Y.T. , Kaplan, B. , Machado, M.A. (in press). Traits and stories: Links between dispositional and narrative features of personality. Journal of Personality. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • McCrae, R.R. (1987). Creativity, divergent thinking, and openness to experience. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 1258–1265. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • McCrae, R.R. (1994). Openness to experience: Expanding the boundaries of Factor V. European Journal of Personality, 8, 251–272. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • McCrae, R.R. , Costa, P.T., Jr. (1980). Openness to experience and ego level in Loevinger’s sentence completion test: Dispositional contributions to developmental models of personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 1179–1190. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • McCrae, R.R. , Costa, P.T., Jr. (1996). Toward a new generation of personality theories: Theoretical contexts for the five-factor model. In J.S. Wiggins, (Ed.), The five-factor model of personality: Theoretical perspectives (pp. 51–87. New York: Guilford. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • McCrae, R.R. , Costa, P.T., Jr. (1999). A Five-Factor Theory of personality. In L.A. Pervin, O.P. John, (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (2nd ed., pp. 139–153. New York: Guilford. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • McCrae, R.R. , Costa, P.T., Jr. (2003). Personality in adulthood: A five-factor theory perspective (2nd. ed.). New York: Guilford. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • McCrae, R.R. , Costa, P.T., Jr. (1988). Age, personality, and the spontaneous self-concept. Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences, 43, S177–S185. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • McCrae, R.R. , Costa, P.T., Jr. , Lima, M.P. , Simões, A. , Ostendorf, F. , Angleitner, A. , Marušić, I. , Bratko, D. , Caprara, G.V. , Barbaranelli, C. , Chae, J.-H. , Piedmont, R.L. (1999). Age differences in personality across the adult life span: Parallels in five cultures. Developmental Psychology, 35, 466–477. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • McCrae, R.R. , Costa, P.T., Jr. , Martin, T.A. , Oryol, V.E. , Rukavishnikov, A.A. , Senin, I.G. , Hřebíčková, M. , Urbánek, T. (in press). Consensual validation of personality traits across cultures. Journal of Research in Personality. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • McCrae, R.R. , Costa, P.T., Jr. , Piedmont, R.L. (1993). Folk concepts, natural language, and psychological constructs: The California Psychological Inventory and the five-factor model. Journal of Personality, 61, 1–26. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • McCrae, R.R. , John, O.P. (1992). An introduction to the Five-Factor Model and its applications. Journal of Personality, 60, 175–215. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • McCrae, R.R. , Stone, S.V. , Fagan, P.J. , Costa, P.T., Jr. (1998). Identifying causes of disagreement between self-reports and spouse ratings of personality. Journal of Personality, 66, 285–313. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Megargee, E.I. , & Swartz, J.D. (1968). Extraversion, neuroticism, and scores on the Holtzman Inkblot Technique. Journal of Projective Techniques and Personality Assessment, 32, 262–265. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Meyer, G.J. , Bates, M. , Gacono, C. (1999). The Rorschach rating scale: Item adequacy, scale development, and relations with the Big Five model of personality. Journal of Personality Assessment, 73, 199–244. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Meyer, G.J. , Handler, L. (1997). The ability of the Rorschach to predict subsequent outcome: Meta-analysis of the Rorschach prognostic rating scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 69, 1–38. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Meyer, G.J. , Viglione, D.J. , Exner, J.E. (2001). Superiority of Form% over Lambda for research on the Rorschach Comprehensive System. Journal of Personality Assessment, 76, 68–75. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Mutén, E. (1991). Self-reports, spouse ratings, and psychophysiological assessment in a behavioral medicine program: An application of the five-factor model. Journal of Personality Assessment, 57, 449–464. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Parker, K.C.H. , Hanson, R.K. , Hunsley, J. (1988). MMPI, Rorschach, and WAIS: A meta-analytic comparison of reliability, stability, and validity. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 367–373. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Paulhus, D.L. (1984). Two-component models of socially desirable responding. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 598–609. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Paulhus, D.L. , Bruce, M.N. , Trapnell, P.D. (1995). Effects of self-presentation strategies on personality profiles and their structure. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 100–108. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Piedmont, R.L. , McCrae, R.R. , Riemann, R. , Angleitner, A. (2000). On the invalidity of validity scales in volunteer samples: Evidence from self-reports and observer ratings in volunteer samples. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 582–593. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Rabin, A.I. , Limuaca, J. (1967). A comparison of the connotative meaning of Rorschach’s inkblots for American and Filipino college students. Journal of Social Psychology, 72, 197–203. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Rapaport, D. (1942). Principles underlying projective techniques. Character and Personality: A Quarterly for Psychodiagnostic and Allied Studies, 10, 213–219. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Riemann, R. , Angleitner, A. , Strelau, J. (1997). Genetic and environmental influences on personality: A study of twins reared together using the self- and peer-report NEO-FFI scales. Journal of Personality, 65, 449–475. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Ritzler, B. , Nalesnik, D. (1990). The effect of inquiry on the Exner comprehensive system. Journal of Personality Assessment, 55, 647–656. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Roberts, B.W. , & DelVecchio, W.F. (2000). The rank-order consistency of personality traits from childhood to old age: A quantitative review of longitudinal studies. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 3–25. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Rolland, J.-P. (2002). Cross-cultural generalizability of the Five-Factor Model of personality. In R.R. McCrae, J. Allik, (Eds.), The five-factor model of personality across cultures (pp. 7–28. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Rouff, L.L. (1975). Openness, creativity and complexity. Psychological Reports, 37, 1009–1010. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Trobst, K. , Wiggins, J.S. (2003). Constructive alternativism in personality assessment: Madeline G. from multiple perspectives. In J.S. Wiggins, (Ed.), Paradigms of personality assessment. New York: Guilford. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Wiggins, J.S. (2003). Paradigms of personality assessment. New York: Guilford. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Wrobel, T.A. , Lachar, D. (1982). Validity of the Wiener subtle and obvious scales for the MMPI: Another example of the importance of inventory-item content. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 50, 469–470. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Zuckerman, M. , Levitt, E.E. , Lubin, B. (1963). Concurrent and construct validity of direct and indirect measures of dependency. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 25, 316–323. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar