PROJECTIVE TECHNIQUES

While most of the projective techniques are weak as psychometric tools, they are widely
used.
An important distinguishing feature of projective techniques is that they require highly
unstructured work. An almost infinite number of responses can be given. Only short guidelines are
used to allow the individual's imagination to unfold freely. Therefore, the test stimulus is often
ambiguous. The hypothesis behind it is that the way an individual perceives and interprets test
material or structures the situation will reflect fundamental aspects of their psychological
functioning. In other words, the test material is expected to be a kind of screen on which to reflect
the individual's thought processes, needs, concerns, and conflicts.
Projective tools are covert testing methods, test takers often unaware of how to interpret
test responses. Projective techniques are tools that are geared towards the overall assessment of
personality as an integrated picture rather than measuring individual trailers. Finally, projective
techniques are generally considered to be effective in revealing hidden, implicit, or unconscious
aspects of personality. Moreover, the less structured the test is, the more sensitive it is considered to
be in revealing ambiguous personality aspects. Its underlying assumption is that the more
unstructured or ambiguous the stimulus, the less it will evoke the subject's defensive reactions.
The projective method has developed in the clinical setting and is used as a clinical tool.
Some of them resulted from the methods of therapy applied to psychiatric patients. The theoretical
basis of many projective techniques reflects the influence of traditional and modern psychoanalytic
concepts. There have also been attempts to link projective techniques to stimulus-response theory
and perceptual theories of personality. Whether a method is practically useful or empirically valid is
more important than its source.

Ink Blot Techniques

Rorschach Developed by the Swiss psychiatrist Hermann Rorscahch, the technique was
first described in 1921. While standardized inkblots have previously been used to explore creativity
and other functions, Rorschach was the first inkblot technique to evaluate personality as a whole.
While developing the technique, Rorschach applied a large number of inkblots to different
psychiatric groups. As a result of these clinical observations, the response characteristics that
distinguish between various psychiatric syndromes formed the scoring system. The scoring system
was developed by testing mental retards and normal people, as well as artists, students, and certain
other groups.
After Rorschach's death in 1922, the development of the test was continued by his
colleagues and students, and in the following years the Rorschach technique became widespread in
Europe and the United States. However, the application, scoring and interpretation methods of the
technique have been differentiated into various methods and systems instead of a single system. The
common thread between the various systems is the original 10 cards and some basic comments on
Rorschach's original work.
Only shades of gray and black on five of the cards; bright red spots on two of them; three of
them are pastel colors. The cards are shown one by one and asked what the stain might be. Subject's
reactions to the cards, reaction time, reaction time, position of the card, non-reactive expressions of
the subject, emotional expressions and other reaction characteristics of the subject during the test
are recorded. After the 10 cards are shown, many practitioners conduct a systematic investigation of
the location and characteristics of the subject's reactions. During this investigation, the subject has
the opportunity to develop and explain their reactions.
The important changes that occurred in the Rorschach systems from the 1930s to the 1960s
were in scoring methods and thus in interpretation. In the Rorschach interpretation, attention may
be focused on response content or on location, determinants, response quality, and other
quantitative characteristics of responses. Rorschach systems vary widely in scoring details and

1
interpretations of responses, but most use basic scoring categories. The site is the area where the
reaction is made in the ink blot. The entire stain may be a common (usual) detail, an unusual detail, a
white area, or a combination of these areas. The determinants of response are shape, colour,
shadow and movement. Although there is no movement in the spot itself, the subject's perception of
the spot as a moving object is scored as movement. In addition, human movement, animal
movement, and abstract or inanimate movement are scored separately. In scoring the shadow,
depth, surface features (texture), wavy forms (hazy forms) as in clouds or darkness and lightness of
black color as in the photograph are distinguished.
The shape (form) nature of the responses or the level of shape indicates the suitability of the
response to the stain area used, its originality, or both. In addition, cognitive complexity and other
qualitative aspects of the response are also scored in some systems.
While certain core categories are scored regularly in different systems, the treatment of
content also differs in different Rorschach systems. The main categories of content are human
figures, human details or parts of a human figure, animal figures, and animal details. Other categories
are art objects, plants, maps, clouds, blood, X-rays, clothing, sexual perceptions, and landforms.
Popularity score is usually determined by popular reactions among people. Each of the 10 cards
features certain popular reactions that are common. In many systems, unusual deviant verbal
expressions are used to identify serious psychopathology.
Further analysis of Rorschach responses is made according to the frequency of responses in
the various categories, as well as the relationships and ratios of the various categories to each other.
Attributes, for example, in interpretation, are linked to conceptual thinking, color responses to
emotionality, and human movement responses to imagination and fantasies. In Rorschach practice, it
is important to define the individual in integrity. Here the clinician combines the information from
the various parts of the protocol and considers the interrelationship of the different scores.
Information from sources such as other tests, interviews and case history is used to define
personality.

Integrative Exner System.

By the 1960s the Rorschach had become a much-debated psychometric tool. There were
challenges, such as variations in the number of responses, operator effects, interdependence of
responses, and the availability of a wide variety of scoring systems. These conditions were
disappointing due to methodological difficulties in Rorschach's validity and reliability studies. While
many clinical psychologists continued to use Rorschach regularly, they tended to use the Rorschach
data from purely impressionistic and qualitative interpretation to more or less committed to one or
more systems.
Two basic systems were used in the United States: Samuel Beck and Bruno Klopfer. The other
three basic systems are: Marquerite Hertz, Zygmunt Piotrowski and David Rapaport and Roy Schafer.
John E. Exner, as a result of his intensive studies examining the clinical use and research literature of
Rorschach, has brought the empirically defensible and useful features of the method into a single
system that integrates on a psychometric basis. (1974, 1991, 1993, 1995).
Exner's integrative system includes standard methods of application, scoring and
interpretation based on empirical comparisons of different groups. Structural variables were given
more importance than content-related variables. According to Exner, the purpose of scoring
responses is to arrive at a structured summary on which interpretation is based. Each response is
coded in terms of different scoring categories such as location, determinants, shape (form) quality,
content, organizing activity, and popularity. The frequencies of the coded responses are counted and
used to calculate ratios, percentages, and indices to create a structural summary. Interpretation is
done using the entire Rorschach protocol. Some hypotheses depend on the frequencies of the
responses, the incidence of a determinant such as shadow; others are based on the ratio of two or
more variables, such as human and animal content. More complex analyzes are based on co-
occurrence of several variables and cut-off points based on empirical data. The variables form groups

2
in indexes that reflect the likelihood of certain disorders, such as the schizophrenia index, the
depression index, and the coping deficit index.
Exner and colleagues collected extensive psychometric data, including adult, child,
adolescent, and diverse psychiatric samples. Test-retest studies at intervals ranging from a few days
to three years showed temporal stationarity for many of the variables scored. The rater reliability of
trained practitioners was also found to be quite high. One of the important contributions of Exner's
work is that he developed a single Rorschach system that enables the comparability of the findings of
different researchers. Thus, Rorschach scoring and interpretation has become the most frequently
used system in education and has increased the statistical power of Rorschach research.
Although the Exner system improved the psychometric aspect of Rorschach, it could not
solve the validity problem. The vast literature on this subject is full of conflicting information. The
Rorschach has been used for purposes beyond the original developers' intentions, such as the MMPI,
which adds to the complexity of validity studies. Overall, meta-analysis studies have shown that the
convergent validity of the Rorschach is comparable to the MMPI. Exner's own work has shown that
many constructs evaluated by his system are valid and useful in describing many aspects of
personality. However, research results on defining complex situations and predicting future behavior
are conflicting.
A key factor complicating the interpretation of Rorschach scores is the total number of
responses, known as response productivity, or R. Differences occur in other scoring categories when
there are large variations in the number of responses in individuals or groups. Thus, the differences
seen in certain categories may only occur depending on the number of responses. Response
productivity, on the other hand, is related to other variables such as intellectual level and education
level.
There are also criticisms of the integrative system developed by Exner. Many Rorschacvh
users objected to the non-theoretical nature of Exner's approach and argued that Exner's overuse of
content data reduced the clinical usefulness of the test. They also stated that the system is too
complex and at times ambiguous and contradictory. Exner's own research has been criticized for
using small sample sizes, too many variables, and lack of cross-validation studies. Despite criticism,
the Exner system, along with its research data, gave life to the Rorschach as a psychometric tool.
Other approaches. While Exner's integrative approach is widely accepted, there are also
some opposing approaches. A more clinically oriented approach has been described by Aronow and
colleagues. This approach treats the Rorschach as a standardized clinical interview that basically
samples the perceptual functions of the person. It emphasizes the interpretation of the content of
the responses rather than the structural variables and perceptual determinants. Content scales and
scoring systems are not considered reliable enough as psychometric tools in individual diagnosis. The
authors recommend the strict clinical application of Rorchach to ensure understanding of individual
cases. Many experienced clinicians turn to this approach as they assist in the psychotherapy process.
Their interpretations are mainly based on response content supported by verbal and nonverbal
behavior. Based on available research and clinical experience, Aronow and colleagues have
developed a set of guidelines for more effective and reliable individual interpretation. For example,
they suggest that responses that are common and that rely less on the stimulant properties of
particular spots are more significant in individual cases. They also warn against a strict system of
symbol interpretation, which always assigns defined meanings to content categories or the same
attributes to Rorschach spots. Instead, they suggest exploring the meaning of responses in a way that
is consistent with general picodynamic principles and draws on the individual's own experiences.
Another approach to Rorschach is that adopted by Paul Lerner (1991). As this work
developed in the 1970s, it is based on modern psychoanalytic theory and is very different from
Exner's non-theoretical approach. In contrast, Exner (1989) argues that Rorschach is a test in which
projection rarely plays a role. Lerner, on the other hand, accepts Rorschach as a method that
basically reflects the inner world of the individual. Lerner has produced a guide for the clinical use
and research applications of Rorschach, based on the evaluation of object representations, defense
mechanisms, and other concepts of psychodynamic theory.

3
 Like many other very frequently used tests, the Rorschach is a widely misused test, and it has
been argued that its time has passed. Technique is now being reborn in terms of research and
theory. Although there are different approaches to Rorschach, users of each approach agree that it is
a valuable technique that explores the perceptual, cognitive and affective aspects of personality.
Holtzman Inkblot Technique. Wayne H. Holtzman made a serious effort to apply
psychometric orientation to inkblots before Exner began working on the integrative Rorschach
system. The Holtzman Inkblot Technique was designed to address Rorschach's basic technical
deficiencies. The changes made to the cards and method are enough to make Holtzman a separate
test and be considered without reference to Rorschach. In the Holtzman technique, there are two
parallel series of 45 cards each; blots were selected from a large pool based on empirical criteria. A
single response is received for each card. Besides colored and colorless cards, some spots are
distinctly asymmetrical.
Implementation and scoring are well standardized. Scores are calculated based on 22
response variables, many of which are found in Rorschach and include some additional variables such
as anxiety and hostility. For each variable, percentage scores of the normal sample of children and
adults and various deviant groups are available. The rater reliability is quite good. Although there are
differences in various response variables in halving, parallel form, and test-retest reliability studies,
most of the results are encouraging. In the group form applied using a slide, there is a
correspondence between the scores in many variables and the scores obtained from the individual
application. HIT 25, the short form applied to the first 25 cards of Form A by asking for 2 responses to
each card, was suggested by Holtzman in 1988 and norm studies are being carried out (Swartz, 1992).
Most of the validity studies of HIT have yielded promising results. Various approaches have
been used in validity studies, such as examining developmental trends in normal groups and
psychiatric patients, cross-cultural comparisons, correlations with other tests and behavioral
determinants of personality traits, and cross-group comparisons. A handbook specifically for clinical
use of HIT was prepared by E. F. Hill (1972).
It is clear that HIT has some psychometric advantages over Rorschach. The presence of
parallel forms of the test allows to determine the test-retest reliability as well as to carry out follow-
up studies. Limiting the number of reactions given to the cards prevents the negativity in Rorschach
scoring by keeping the number of reactions equal for everyone. However, uncontrollable response
length (word count) has been shown to significantly affect many HIT scores. Despite the positive
aspects of HIT, information about the test is scarce compared to Rorschach, and more data are
needed to establish the diagnostic significance of various scores and the construct validity of
personality variables.

PICTURE TECHNIQUES

Thematic Perception Test.

It was developed by Henry Murray and colleagues at the Harvard Psychology Clinic (1938).
TAT's stimuli are more structured than Rorschach's and require meaningfully organized verbal
responses. Interpretation of responses is also often based on highly qualitative content analysis.
TAT has been used extensively in clinical practice and research, as well as a model for the
development of many tests. TAT consists of 19 cards with black and white indistinct pictures and one
blank card. A story that fits each picture is asked to be told; what caused the event shown in the
picture, what is happening now, what are the characters thinking and feeling, and what is the result.
Ask the blank card to portray a picture, describe it, and tell a story about it. In the original method
described by Murray in his test manual, 10 cards are applied in each of two one-hour applications.
The cards used in the second application are less common, dramatic and strange; instruction is for
the subjects to challenge their imagination. Out of 20 cards, there are separate cards for girls, boys,
women over 14 and men. Most clinicians use 10 individually selected cards and no more than 10
cards are applied.

4
 In the original interpretation of TAT (Murray et al., 1943), the practitioner first determines
the "hero" with which character the responder identifies with. The content of the stories is then
examined based on Murray's list of "needs" and "pressure". Some needs are achievement (doing the
best to accomplish something difficult), conformity (deference to what is expected of oneself),
exposure (being the center of attention), intraception (analyzing one's own and others' motives and
feelings), dominance (influencing others and being accepted as a leader), helping (nurturanca)
(helping those in need), belonging (being with others), aggression.
Pressure is environmental forces that make it difficult or easier to satisfy needs. Being
attacked or criticized, feeling affection, being comforted, and facing physical danger are examples of
pressure. In assessing the importance of a particular need or pressure, attention is paid to the
qualities of intensity, duration, and frequency in different stories, but also whether they occur only in
relation to a particular picture. It is accepted that the unusual story, which is different from the usual
reactions to the picture, has a special meaning for the individual.
A great deal of norm information has been published regarding common response features
for each card, such as the way each card is perceived, the themes developed, the roles attributed to
the characters, the emotional tone, reaction speed, and the length of the stories. While these norm
data provide a general framework for the interpretation of individual responses, most clinicians refer
to "subjective norms" based on knowledge of the subject from experience with testing and other
sources. Some quantitative scoring and rating scales with good rater reliability have been developed.
Since their application takes a long time, they are not used frequently in clinical practice. It is typically
used as a verbal test in the clinical setting, but can also be administered as a group test by writing.
TAT has been used extensively in personality research. The large differences in
administration and scoring procedures make it very difficult to investigate the psychometric
properties of TAT. In addition, there is a large body of empirical data showing that conditions such as
hunger, insomnia, and social inhibition significantly affect TAT responses. The sensitivity of TAT to
such transient conditions complicates the meaning of the responses. The internal consistency of TAT
responses was also investigated. It was found that the length or efficiency of the stories needed to be
moderated. The value of thematic detection techniques in general and TAT in particular cannot be
disputed. Recent studies confirm the clinical utility of TAT, both in traditional applications that assess
the degree of psychopathology and the use of defense mechanisms, and in new applications that
evaluate problem-solving skills. One of the promising applications of TAT is the scales developed for
the evaluation of object relations. The utility of TAT is not limited to thematic analysis of responses;
The formal features of the content and structure of TAT stories can be used efficiently in the research
of individuals and groups.
Adaptation of TAT and Related Tests. Many adaptations of TAT have been made for specific
purposes. They show varying degrees of resemblance to the original. Various adaptations of the TAT
have been made for business consultancy, manager evaluation and various researches, as well as
investigating problems related to working life, minority groups, authority. Forms have been
developed for preschool children, schoolchildren, children and adolescents with disabilities, and
various ethnic groups. Some TAT adaptations have focused on measuring a single need or drive, such
as sexuality or aggression. Special attention was paid to the need for achievement and four images,
two of which were taken from the TAT, were used to measure it. Detailed scoring schemes were
prepared to examine the need for achievement statements. Meta-analysis studies on the comparison
of TAT and inquiry scales in terms of achievement need have shown that both methods are valid for
different purposes and in different aspects.
Although many adaptations of TAT reflect Murray's views, there are other theoretical
approaches as well. These systems emphasize the explicit content rather than the symbolic content
of the thought sample; is more research-oriented than clinical practice.
Although the original TAT can be applied to children up to 4 years of age, the Children's
Perception Test (CAT) has been developed for children aged 3-10 (Bellak, 1975). Acting on the
assumption that young children will reflect on animal pictures rather than human pictures, animals
have replaced humans on CAT cards. The various animals in the paintings are drawn in typical human

5
situations. The pictures are crafted to reveal fantasies about feeding problems and other oral
activities, sibling jealousy, parent-child relationships, aggression, toilet training, and other child
experiences. The authors of CAT have also prepared a human-figure form of the test for use with
older children, especially those over the age of 10 (CAT-H). The authors state that the human or
animal form can be used more effectively in accordance with the child's age and personality
characteristics.
Developed later, the Roberts Test of Perception for Children (RATC) meets psychometric
standards better than other tests of its kind in terms of test development and assessment
techniques. RATC consists of 16 cards, separate for boys and girls, some of them the same for both
genders. Pictures show children in interpersonal relationships with adults and other children. Stories
are scored on a series of scales related to the problems of bringing children to the clinic. Scoring of
responses is fairly objective; The norms are based on the responses of 200 well-adjusted children
chosen by the teachers. Comparing these responses with the responses of 200 children seen in child
guidance clinics constitutes the validity studies in the handbook. This scale attempts to combine the
flexibility of projective techniques with the ways of administering, scoring and evaluating
standardized tests. Validity studies of RATC for various uses give positive results.
Perception tests have also been developed for the elderly (Gerontological Perception Test;
Wolk & Wolk, 1971) and (Elderly Perception Test; Bellak & Bellak, 1973). Both tests contain pictures
that show one or more elderly people in situations that may be related to old age, such as loneliness,
family difficulties, helplessness, and powerlessness. Both tests have been criticized for giving the
impression that aging-related negativities are permanent. In addition, these tests have not been
shown to be superior to CAM in the elderly.

Rosenzweig Illustrated Frustration Test.

The scope of the test is limited and requires simple responses. There are different forms for
adults over 14 years old, adolescents 12-18 years old, and children 4-13 years old. It is based on the
authors' theory of frustration and aggression. In pictures, one person blocks the other or draws
attention to the blocked situation. It is requested to fill the empty balloons of the cartoon pictures.
In the test, responses are scored in terms of the type and direction of aggression. Types of
aggression: obstacle-dominance, indication of obstructive object; ego defense is the concentration of
attention on the protection of the disabled person and the continuity of need, the focus on the
constructive solution of the hindering problem. Direction of aggression: overly aggressive or
peripheral, outward oriented; it is directed inward, towards the person himself, and tends to cover
up mistakes or avoid the situation. While scoring the test, the percentage of responses falling into
these categories is compared with the percentages of the norm. There may also be a tendency for
the individual to respond in a manner consistent with the responses in the standardization sample.
Because the scope of the test is limited, highly structured, and the scoring method is
objective, it is more suitable for statistical analysis than many other projective techniques.

6
VERBAL TECHNIQUES

While all projective tools require verbal responses, some are purely verbal. Only words are
used in both stimuli and responses. Although some of the verbal techniques can be applied verbally
or in writing, all of them are suitable for written group practice. When applied as such, it requires a
minimum level of reading and knowledge of the language in which the test is administered. These
circumstances preclude the application of such techniques to young children or those who do not
speak the language.
The technique that pioneered projective tests half a century ago is the word association test.
The technique, originally called "free association testing", was first described by Galton (1879).
Wundt and J. McK. Cattell later introduced the technique into psychology labs, adapting it for many
uses. In this technique, a series of unrelated words is given and the individual is asked to respond to
each word with the first word that comes to mind. The first experimental psychologists and the first
to use mental tests saw them as tools to reveal thought processes.
Although psychiatrists such as Kraepelin have previously dealt with word association
techniques, the psychoanalytic movement has been largely influential in the application of these
methods for clinical evaluation. Jung's contribution to the development of the word association test
is significant. Jung (1910) chose words that he expected to elicit "emotional complexes" and
examined responses in terms of reaction time, content, and physical expressions of emotional
tension. Thirty years later, a similar word association technique was developed at the Menninger
Clinic by Rappaport and colleagues (1946/1968). According to the authors, the test has two
purposes: to reveal the disorder in thought processes and important areas of conflict. The word
association technique can also be used as a "lie detector". This practice was initiated by Jung and
later became the subject of intense research in both laboratory and practice areas. The rationale
behind the use of the word association to reveal lies or guilt is the same as when it is used to reveal
emotional conflicts.
A different approach to the word association test is seen in the work of Kent and Rosanoff
(1910). Completely objective scoring was used in the Kent-Rosanoff Free Association Test, which was
originally designed as a psychiatric screening tool. 100 common neutral words were chosen as the
stimulus because they often evoke the same connotations in humans. For example, most people
respond to the word table as “chair” and to the word dark as “light”. Frequency tables were
prepared for each stimulus word based on the number of responses given in a sample of 1000
normal adults. In scoring the test, the "normality index" was determined for each test administered
according to the frequency values of the responses. Comparison of psychotic individuals with
normals showed that psychotics had a lower usualness index than normal ones.
Diagnostic application of the word association test decreased as it was understood that
response frequency varies greatly depending on age, socioeconomic level, religious and cultural
background, creativity, and other factors. In order to interpret the results appropriately, many
subgroup norms must be obtained and words must be updated from time to time according to
changes in word usage. Also, the popularity of traditional psychoanalytic concepts that stimulated
the use of these techniques has declined. Still, the Kent-Rosanoff test remained a standard
laboratory tool. Additional norms were collected in various countries and the technique was used
extensively in the study of verbal behavior and personality.
Another verbal projective technique is sentence completion and has been used extensively in
both research and clinical practice. In terms of response length, structuring, and other aspects,
sentence completion is somewhere in the middle of word association and thematic techniques.
Usually there are almost unlimited possibilities of completion for starting words or sentence roots.
For example, My ambition......., Women......., What worries me......, My mother... This flexibility of
sentence completion is advantageous for clinical and research purposes. In addition, standard forms
prepared for general practice have also been published. A common example is the Rotter Sentence
Completion Test (RISB-Rotter & Rafferty, 1950), which consists of 40 sentence stems. The Directive
states, “Complete these sentences to express your true feelings. Try to do them all. Make sure it is a

7
complete sentence.” Each sentence is graded for agreement or inconsistency on a 7-point scale. The
handbook explains how to evaluate each degree. The sum of the ratings gives the total fit score that
can be used for the screening purpose. Response contexts can be examined clinically for more
specific diagnostic clues. The new revised handbook of RISB includes updated norm information and
a summary of work done since 1950 (Rotter, Lah, & Rafferty, 1992).
Many sentence completion tests have been developed for the assessment of different
groups and for various research and diagnostic uses. Some interesting new tools have been
developed in areas such as detecting lying in disability examination, evaluating structures such as
defense mechanisms.

AUTOBIOGRAPHIC MEMORIES

One of the recent and promising developments in the field of projective verbal techniques is
the increased interest in autobiographical memories. Examination of memories of the first years of
life in order to understand recurrent and uncontrollable conflicts in the later years of life has been
the main subject of psychodynamic psychotherapy since Freud. The individual psychology developed
by Alfred Adler accepts the first memories as the basis for understanding the individual's lifestyle.
Other theorists also saw autobiographical memories as constructs or projections rather than actual
historical events, but stated that they play a fundamental role in the development of personality.
At the beginning of the 1980s, a new interest in autobiographical memories has started due
to the effect of the cognitive perspective and its function in personality organization in general and in
particular. Arnold R. Bruhn is important in this area (Bruhn, 1984, 1985, 1990). Bruhn, after reviewing
the models that the Fredians, Adlerians, and ego psychologists applied to the interpretations of early
memories, proposed a new conceptual framework and a systematic approach to them.
Autobiographical memories (EM) are important for understanding personality in Bruhn's cognitive-
perceptual theory. Bruhn's priority was to develop a standardized method for collecting and
interpreting memories. The First Memories Method (EMP-Bruhn, 1989, 1992) is a self-administered
paper-and-pencil test sampling 21 autobiographical memories from the entire life span.
The first part consists of six general and spontaneous memories of a certain time in life
(especially the first five memories and an important memory for the whole life), the second part 15
memories of various specific or clinically relevant events and areas (a traumatic memory, a memory
of first punishment or happiest moment) occurs. While EMP guidelines are intended to elicit
memories of "inappropriate sexual experience and physical or emotional abuse," responders may
state that they have not had such experiences. In addition to defining each memory as a story,
various investigations are made in terms of clarity, affective tone, importance and other
characteristics of memories in EMP. Bruhn considers specific events to be stories that reflect what
people have learned before or have intuited from their life experiences. He also believes that these
stories are often inaccurate or distorted, but that truth is not important for clinical purposes
because, as with other projective data, the value of EMs is in their power to reveal current interests,
attitudes, beliefs, and affective states.
Although Bruhn et al have developed an Integrative First Memories Scoring System (Last &
Bruhn, 1991), Bruhn's approach to scoring and interpreting autobiographical memories is quite
flexible.
EMP is a technique under development. Norm studies have not yet been carried out. While
rater agreement is sufficient among the various scoring categories developed by Bruhn et al., there is
not much empirical evidence for other types of reliability. It is clear that obtaining psychometric data
in EMP will be problematic. As with other projective data, categorizing and quantitatively analyzing
autobiographical memories will destroy the information necessary to understand the person. The
method has the potential to become a very useful tool in personality assessment, especially within
the framework of psychotherapy.

8
PERFORMANCE TECHNIQUES

A wide category of projective techniques consists of various methods by which the individual
can express himself quite freely. The peculiarity of these techniques is that they are used for
treatment as well as diagnosis. These techniques reveal more than an individual's expression of their
emotional difficulties. Commonly used methods are drawing and various types of game techniques.
Although these methods can be used for adults in many cases, they are especially for children.
Drawing Techniques. The Machover Human Drawing Test (DAP-Machover, 1949) is a well-
known example. The individual is asked to draw a picture of a person. After completing the first
picture, they are asked to draw a picture of the opposite sex. While drawing the individual picture,
the practitioner writes down his observations, such as the order in which the various body parts are
drawn. After the drawing, questions are asked about the age of the drawing, educational status, job
and other characteristics of the drawn character. It may also be desirable to tell a story about each
person drawn in the investigation.
Machover's proposed interpretation of the DAP is essentially qualitative and is replete with
single symptom-based interpretations. For example, a large head ratio is often seen in cases of
organic brain disease. While citing thousands of cases studied in the clinical setting and describing
some selected case examples, data were not systematically presented in the original test reports.
Validation studies by other researchers have generally not supported Machover's interpretations of
diagnosis.
Another technique based on a more solid empirical basis, using human figure drawings of
children and young adolescents, was developed by Human Figure Drawings (HFDs) Koppitz (1968,
1984). Koppitz developed two objective scoring systems and standardized HFDs for the assessment
of children based on drawings of 1856 public school students aged 5-12 years. One system is based
primarily on the Goodenough-Harris Drawing Test and Koppitz's own clinical experience and treats
HFDs as a developmental test for mental maturity. The second is a projective test that reflects
children's interpersonal attitudes and interests, based on the work of Machover et al. The test has a
list of 30 emotional symptoms that distinguish between drawings of children with and without
emotional problems. These symptoms were very rare in the normal children in the sample and,
unlike developmental characteristics, were not associated with age and maturity level. These are a)
qualitative signs of the face such as transparency and shadow features,
b) features such as small heads or odd figures c) omission of some features such as neck and
eyes. Some of the features of HFDs, such as awkwardness or emotional symptoms, can distinguish
problem children from children who seem well-adjusted. Koppitz and other researchers still caution
against using a single symptom or sign for diagnostic purposes. There is consensus that HFDs give
only a general idea of children's emotional adjustment. Many experts state that drawings should be
used for diagnostic purposes only as general hypotheses that should be interpreted in conjunction
with other information about the individual.
Another widely used technique is House-Tree-Human (H-T-P). House, tree and human
pictures are asked to be drawn separately (Buck, 1948, 1992). The features of the pictures are used
as hypotheses to indicate areas of conflict and interest, along with information from the investigation
after the drawing process. In Kinetic Family Drawing (Kinetic Family Drawing, KFD- Burns, 1982; Burns
and Kaufman, 1970, 1972), a newer technique that seems to have tremendous potential as a clinical
tool, from children to drawing everyone in the family, including themselves, while doing something.
boots are required. KFD has led to a great deal of research. Handler and Habenicht (1994) reported
that although there are methodological problems in research on this technique, promising findings
were obtained by using methods such as multidimensional regression analysis. In KFD, for example,
the distance between the figures and the degree of interaction are the significant features of the
drawings.
The drawing technique is also used in cooperation with the whole family or married couple
and under the supervision of one or more therapists who observe the behavior of the individual (G.
Smith, 1991). This interaction technique is inspired by CFD and is used in family therapy.

9
 Game Techniques and Toy Tests. Objects used in projective tests such as puppets, dolls, small
figures are used in various game techniques and toy tests. These materials, which were used in the
treatment of play with children, were later adapted to diagnostic tests for both adults and children.
The objects most frequently used for these purposes are, for example, toys representing adults and
children of both sexes, animals, furniture, bathroom and kitchen utensils, and other household
furnishings. There are these types of materials that are standardized in the Sceno test. It was
published in Switzerland in the 1960s and has recently been used in the United States (Staabs, 1991).
It is expected that the child's playing with such equipment will reveal his attitude towards his family,
sibling jealousy, fears, aggression, conflicts and the like. The practitioner records which tools the
child chooses and what he does with them, the child's verbalizations, emotional expressions, and
other overt behaviors.
The practitioner lays out the toys in front of the child so that they can play freely. For adults,
the material is supplied with instruction asking them to do a structured job. This directive can also be
used with children. The figures are asked to be arranged using the cover of the material's box as a
stage.

EVALUATION OF PROJECTIVE TECHNIQUES

Rapport. Many projective techniques are an effective way to break the ice during the first
relationship between the clinician and the client. Because work is fundamentally interesting and
often enjoyable, it distracts the individual from himself, thereby reducing embarrassment and
defensiveness. Since any response is not right or wrong, it does not pose a threat to the prestige of
the client.
Some projective techniques may be particularly helpful in young children, the uneducated,
and those with speech or language impairments.
Don't Lie. In general, projective instruments are more sensitive to lying than self-report
inventories. Because the purpose of projective techniques is obscured, it is difficult to understand
the complex ways of scoring and interpreting responses, even if the individual has psychological
awareness and familiarity with tests such as Rorschach and TAT.
On the other hand, it cannot be said that projective tests completely prevent lying.
Rorschach and studies with TAT and other projective tools revealed significant differences when
respondents were asked to change their responses to leave a positive or negative impression, or
when certain types of responses were requested (Masling, 1960). The clinician is sensitive both to
the nature of individual responses and response patterns and to signs of lying to the inconsistency of
responses with information from other sources of information.
Enforcement and Situational Changes. Many projective techniques in terms of application
and scoring are not sufficiently standardized or used in a standardized manner in clinical practice.
There is evidence that changing the wording of verbal instructions will significantly alter performance
on these tests. Even given the same instructions, some practitioners may be more encouraging,
others more threatening, depending on their general attitude and outlook. Such differences can
affect response efficiency, defensiveness, stereotypicality, imagination, and other performance
characteristics.
Although objective scoring systems have been developed and implemented, the evaluation
or integration and integration of raw data often relies on experimenter skill and clinical experience.
Interpretation of scores is as projective for the experimenter as it is for the subject. In other words,
the final interpretation of projective test responses reveals the experimenter's theoretical
orientation, favored hypotheses, and peculiarities in his personality better than the subject's
personality dynamics.
norms. Norm data may be absent, insufficient, or based on poorly defined universes. The lack
of adequate objective norms pushes the clinician to use their own clinical experience to interpret
projective test performance. This approach suffers from memory distortions, which are reflections of
theoretical biases, biases, and other biases. Moreover, any clinician's experience may be limited to

10
individuals with different educational background, socioeconomic status, gender, age distribution,
and other relevant qualifications. In addition, the clinician will have a biased view, mainly dealing
with pathological individuals. Thus, the clinician may have little first-hand familiarity with the
characteristics of test reactions of normal subjects. The Rorschach norms prepared by Exner are
intended to attempt to correct such biases.

Reliability

In projective techniques, rater reliability should include not only the more objective initial
scoring, but also the final integration and interpretation periods. For example, it is not enough for
experimenters using the same Rorschach scoring system to agree on scoring features such as whole,
detail, or color responses. In the Rorschach, such raw quantitative measures cannot be interpreted
by looking at the norm table as in other psychological tests. Interpretation rater reliability is when
different experimenters interpret the same recordings and evaluate the subject with the same
personality traits. In some such rater reliability studies, significant differences were found between
the comments of well-qualified testers.
Internal consistency coefficients are generally low. Since different cards or items are not
comparable in tests such as the Rorschach, TAT, and Rosenzweig P-F, split-half reliability should not
be used. In such tests, different items are arranged to measure different variables. To measure the
reliability of internal consistency in projective tests, the solution would be to develop parallel forms,
as in the Holtzman Inkblot Technique.
Test-retest reliability can reveal the actual personality changes that tests should measure
over long intervals. In the short range, the first reactions are memorable. Scores on projective tests
are based on very poor response samples. For example, in the protocol of an individual in Rorschach,
the number of responses in categories such as human movement, animal movement, shadow, color,
unusual detail is too low to provide reliable results. In such cases, the changes due to chance are too
much. Ratios and percentages based on unreliable measures are even less stable.

Validity

Most of the validity studies of projective tests are related to concurrent criterion validity.
Most compare the performance of opposing groups, such as occupational or diagnostic. Other
concurrent validity studies have used a matching technique that compares personality descriptions
from test records with case histories, psychiatric interviews, and long-term behavioral records of the
same individuals. Few studies have investigated its predictiveness by criteria such as educational
achievement, job performance, or response to psychotherapy.
Most published research on the validity of projective techniques has approximate flaws in
both experimental controls, statistical analysis, or both. Spurious evidence of validity may be found
as a result of some attitudinal disturbances. An example of this is skewing the criterion or test data.
Reviewers may have some information about the subject's test performance. The experimenter may
have obtained clues about the subject's characteristics from speaking to the subject during test
administration or from case history and other non-test sources. The way to check for this final
distortion of validity is to use blind analysis, interpreted by the rater, who has no relation to the test
record and has no knowledge of the subject other than the information in the test protocol.
However, clinicians argue that blind analysis is not a natural way to interpret projective test
responses and is not a way used in clinical practice of these tools.
Another source of pseudo-validity data is non-cross-validation. Because many projective
tests have a large number of diagnostic marks or scoring elements, it is very easy to distinguish
between groups of criteria for these marks, simply by chance. The validity of such a scoring key may
drop to zero in new samples.
Another mistake is stereotypical punctuality. Certain definitions found in the Rorschach
protocol may apply to people in general, or to young men or inpatients, or to any category of people

11
in the sample of a particular study. The fit between the criterion and the test data will be spurious.
To control this error, it is necessary to measure the agreement between the test evaluation of one
subject and the criterion evaluation for another subject in the same category. This measure will
indicate the amount of mismatch resulting from stereotypical acuity.
Another source of error is basing the validity of diagnostic signs on clinical experience, which
Chapman (1967) calls phantom validity. It is partly due to the use of the diagnostic symptom system
despite the negative empirical validity data. In a series of classic experiments to test this
phenomenon, Chapman and Chapman (1967) showed college students drawings of people, similar to
Machover's Drawing of Humans Test (DAP). It was seen that the subjects responded according to
popular stereotypes, although the results were not consistent with the data taught in their learning
experiences. For example, atypical eyes were associated with skepticism, a large head with anxiety
about intelligence, and broad shoulders with masculinity. Not only were the interpretations
unrelated to the empirical connections they learned, but other experiments showed that these
stereotypical cultural associations were resistant to intense training to change them.
Imaginary validity is a specific example of the mechanism underlying superstitions. We tend
to notice and remember those that fit our expectations, and ignore and forget those that don't
match our expectations. This mechanism may prevent clinicians who adhere to a particular
diagnostic system from using valid diagnostic signs. Similar to Chapman and Chapman's work with
DAP was also done with the Rorschach and Sentence Completion Tests.
On the other hand, some experimental studies may underestimate the validity of projective
tests. For example, traditional psychiatric categories, such as schizophrenia or personality disorder,
describe the actual disorders in the patient with rough classifications. Negative results are not valid if
only such categories are used as the sole criteria for determining the validity of a personality test.
When such a criterion is used, although the projective test is a valid measure of the personality trait
it aims to measure, these traits may be weakly linked to the chosen criterion.
Testers emphasize the importance of integrative principles in personality assessment. Many
criticize the validation of disaggregated single signs, single scores, or diagnostic signs in projective
techniques. Non-significant correlations may result from ignoring the complex relationship patterns
between personality variables. For example, the relationship between aggression in TAT and
aggression in overt behavior is not simple. Depending on personality traits such as anxiety level or
fear of punishment, aggression in fantasy can be linked to more or less aggression.
The low correlation between aggression expressions in TAT stories and aggression in overt
behavior is consistent with expectations. The relationship may be positive in some individuals and
negative in others. On the other hand, the absence of correlation may also be consistent with the
hypothesis that the test does not show aggressive tendencies.
Projective Hypothesis. The traditional assumption about projective techniques is that the
individual's responses to the ambiguous stimulus will reflect meaningful and highly persistent traits
of personality traits. However, new studies suggest that many other factors will affect these
reactions. Test-retest studies have shown that there are often significant transient changes due to
significant chance errors. Experimental studies showing the sensitivity of projective test responses to
transient situations indicated that factors such as hunger, insomnia, drugs, anxiety and inhibition are
effective. Significant response changes were also found due to instructional changes, practitioner
characteristics, and test taker's perception of test taking. Ability factors, and especially verbal ability,
affect many projective test scores. In the light of these findings, projective test responses can only be
meaningfully interpreted if the practitioner is well aware of the conditions and abilities in which they
were obtained, and the history of the test area.
In another respect, the usefulness of unstructured and ambiguous stimuli has been
questioned (Epstein, 1966). The stimulus is uncertain for the test taker as well as for the tester, thus
increasing uncertainty in interpreting the test taker's responses. On the other hand, when the
stimulus is specific, it is possible to select the stimuli related to the personality traits to be evaluated
and to change the nature of the stimulus that will reveal a certain personality dimension. Such an
approach makes the interpretation of test performance more obvious than shooting blindly at the

12
ambiguous stimulus. There is also counter-evidence to the assumption that the ambiguous stimulus
will reveal deeper levels of personality. In fact, the relationship between uncertainty and projection
is not linear, with moderate uncertainty maximizing projection.
The assumption that the imagination evoked by projective techniques such as TAT will reveal
hidden motivational tendencies has also been met with skepticism. For example, in a 20-year
longitudinal study of the relationship between TAT imagination and overt behavior, adolescent
activities predicted TAT imagination better than adolescent TAT imagination predicted adult activity
(McClelland, 1966; Skolnick, 1966). Individuals with upward social mobility in adolescence scored
high in the need for achievement in adulthood; but those who scored high in the need for
achievement in adolescence did not show upward social mobility later on.
It is more appropriate to consider TAT responses as thoughts influenced by previous
experiences, rather than as projective expressions of motives. Individuals who have had more
success before and who have been more confronted with success-oriented models in their
developmental stories tend to perceive more success themes in ambiguous pictures.
Projective Techniques as Clinical Tools. Despite the inadequacy of projective techniques in
terms of psychometrics and contradictory results on this subject, the use of projective techniques has
not decreased, but increased. This is because many projective techniques are considered clinical
tools rather than psychometric tools or tests. In the hands of the skilled clinician they serve as
auxiliary tools for the qualitative interview. As clinical tools, their value is proportional to the skill of
the clinician and cannot be evaluated independently of the clinician using it. Thus, it may not be
appropriate to evaluate them with a psychometric approach. Detailed scoring systems that give
quantitative scores can be time-consuming and misleading. Such scoring approaches may reveal an
illusory objectivity and give the impression that the technique can be used as a test. The value of
projective techniques may emerge when they are scored and interpreted with qualitative clinical
approaches rather than interpretations as if they were psychometric tools.
Objective psychometric tests provide information with a high degree of reliability in a narrow
area, while projective and interview techniques provide broader information with less reliability. In
addition, the information obtained from any projective technique varies from individual to individual.
A person's TAT responses, for example, reveal much about their aggression and little about their
creativity or need for achievement; It gives little information about the other's aggression and can
provide a full assessment of the level of creativity and the strength of the need for achievement.
Obtaining such erratic information in individual cases may explain the low validity found in projective
test responses when any particular trait is investigated in a group of individuals.

13