The comparative validities of the Rorschach and MMPI: A meta-analysis.
- 1 July 1986
- journal article
- research article
- Published by American Psychological Association (APA) in Canadian Psychology / Psychologie canadienne
- Vol. 27 (3) , 238-247
- https://doi.org/10.1037/h0084337
Abstract
A meta-analysis comparing "undirected" and "conceptual" MMPI studies, and conceptual Rorschach and MMPI studies, indicated the following conclusions. (a) Conceptual work more successfully validates an assessment instrument than does undirected investigation. (b) The validatory success of the "average" conceptual Rorschach study is comparable to that of similar MMPI work. This finding suggests that the former''s questionable status may be based on sociocultural factors, rather than scientific ones. (c) The "average" conceptual Rorschach or MMPI study has only modest explanatory power. (d) Investigators'' misuse of .chi.2 has resulted in exaggerated effect size in many instances where the statistic was employed. It is suggested that future research be judged on the coherence of its inference processes, the specificity of its predictions, and the amount of variance it explains.This publication has 2 references indexed in Scilit:
- Rorschach validity: An empirical approach to the literatureJournal of Clinical Psychology, 1986
- A Meta-Analysis of the Reliability and Validity of the RorschachJournal of Personality Assessment, 1983