Psychology of the Rorschach blot. Psychological Rorschach test (ink blots)

The Rorschach test ("Rorschach blots") is a psychological projection test containing 10 printed cards (5 black and white, 5 color). It was created in 1921 and published by psychologist Hermann Rorschach in the journal Psychodiagnostik. During the 1940s and 1950s, this test was integrally associated with clinical psychology.

During much of the 20th century, the Rorschach test was very common and a well-interpreted psychological test. For example, in studies from 1947 (Louttit and Browne) and 1961 (Sundberg), it was ranked as the fourth and first psychological test, respectively, in terms of frequency of use.

Despite its widespread use, the Rorschach test has been associated with a large number of controversies. Researchers have often encountered difficulties in systematically studying the test and its results, and the use of several various systems The ratings of responses given to each image created some confusion.

"Rorschach stains" or a test for psychopaths

Life is a hall of mirrors, an amalgam, a Rorschach test, you see in it only what is inside you.
Al Quotion. Collocation

The Story of Rorschach

Hermann Rorschach never told anyone how he came up with the idea for the test. However, like many figures of that time, he often played the popular game Blotto (Clexography), in which associations associated with poetry are selected or charades are created using inkblots.

Cards with such ready-made inkblots could be easily purchased in stores at that time. In addition, his close personal friend and teacher Konrad Goering could have suggested using these spots as a psychological tool.

When Eugen Bleuler coined the term "schizophrenia" in 1911, Rorschach became interested in the topic and wrote a dissertation on hallucinations (Bleuler was Rorschach's dissertation chairman). While working with patients suffering from schizophrenia, Rorschach accidentally discovered that they reacted differently to Blotto's game than other people.

He gave a brief presentation about his discovery to the local psychiatric society, but then that was the end of it. It was only after he opened a psychiatric practice at the Russian Crombaz hospital in Herisau in 1917 that he became interested in systematically studying the Blotto game.

In his studies from 1918 to 1921, Rorschach used about 40 inkblots, but only 15 of them were regularly used on his patients. Ultimately, he collected data from 405 subjects (117 were not his patients, and he used them as a control group).

His scoring method did not focus on the content of the answers, but on classifying the answers according to their various characteristics. To do this, he used a set of codes - today called ratings - to determine whether the answer applied to the entire image (W), to a large part of it (D), or to a smaller detail. A score of F was used for a response related to the shape of the detail of the spot, and a score of C indicated that the color of the spot was included in the response.

In 1919-1921 he tried to find a publisher to publish his discoveries and the regularly used 15 inkblot cards. However, all publishers refused to publish all 15 stain images due to the cost of printing. Finally, in 1921, he found a publisher - House of Bircher - willing to publish his spots, but only 10 of them. Rorschach revised his manuscript to include only the 10 most commonly used blots out of 15.

Alas, the print was not of high enough quality to correctly convey the original stains. The original Rorschach blots had no halftones - they were pure colors. Reproducing them in print added nuance. But rumor has it that Rorschach was quite pleased with this new addition to his stains. After publishing a monograph entitled Form Interpretation Test, he died in hospital in 1922 due to abdominal pain. Rorschach lived only 37 years, and he formally worked on his inkblot tests for only four years.

Scoring systems in the Rorschach test

Until the 1970s, there were five main systems for rating the responses given by people who see these spots. Among them, two systems dominated - the Beck and Klopfer systems. The other three systems were used less frequently. These were the systems of Hertz, Piotrovsky and Rapaport-Shafer. In 1969, John E. Exner, Jr. published the first comparison of these five systems, entitled The Rorschach Systems.

The revelation of Exner's stunning analysis was that there were, in fact, no five grading systems for Rorschach blots. Exner concluded that these five systems differed from each other so greatly and significantly that it could be considered that five different "Rorschach tests" were created. It's time to go back to the drawing board.

Following his alarming discovery, Exner set out to create a new, comprehensive Rorschach scoring system that would combine the best components of these five existing systems, supplemented by extensive empirical research on each component.

The work began in 1968 and included important research into creating a new system for rating Rorschach blots. As a result, in 1973, Exner published the first edition of The Rorschach: A Comprehensive System. In this work he presented new system assessments, which has become the new gold standard (and the only assessment system taught to psychologists today).

What does the Rorschach test measure?

The Rorschach blot test was not originally intended to be a projective measure of personality characteristics. Instead, he had to construct a personality profile of a person with schizophrenia (or another mental disorder) based on frequency ratings.

Rorschach himself was skeptical about using his test to projectively measure personality characteristics.

The Rorschach test, at its most basic level, is a task that provides a reflection of the psychology of the person taking the test, as well as establishing some level of understanding of the patient's past and future behavior.

Patients often use imagination to formulate an answer, but the underlying process of solving this problem has little to do with imagination or creativity.

How is the Rorschach test performed?

The person taking the test is given a card with a spot printed on it and asked, “What could it be?” Responses are usually recorded verbatim (today recording devices are used for this) because they will later be assessed by a psychologist.

Exner divided the subject's answer to the question of what is shown on the map into three primary phases:

In phase 1, while a person is looking at the map, his brain is encoding the stimulus (the spot) and all its details. It then categorizes the stimuli and their parts, and the brain develops an informal ordering (ranking) of possible responses.
In phase 2, the person discards possible answers that have a low rank and checks the remaining answers that seem suitable to him.
In Phase 3, the person selects some of the filtered responses based on characteristics, styles, or other sources of influence.

If a person reacts to the general contours of the spot, then, according to Exner, there is a slight projection. However, when the subject begins to embellish his answer, or adds more information than was originally given to him, this may be a sign of projection occurring at the moment. In other words, a person tells the psychologist something about himself, or about his life, because he goes beyond the characteristics of the spot itself.

Mirror reflections are not much different from Rorschach tests
-
looking at them, we become a victim of our own myopia or our fears.
Ray Bradbury. Midnight Dragon Dance

After the patient goes through all ten spots for the first time and tells the psychologist what he sees in each spot, the psychologist should again offer each spot to the person, asking the person taking the test to help the psychologist see what the person saw when he first answered. It is here that the psychologist receives certain details for a clearer understanding of what different aspects and where exactly the subject saw in each spot.

Rorschach test score

Scoring the Rorschach test is a very complex task that requires good preparation and experience in administering the test. Only professional psychologists are properly trained and have the experience necessary to correctly interpret the results.

Thus, any “Rorschach test” that you can take online on the Internet, or that is performed/interpreted by a specialist in another discipline, may produce unreliable results or be of little benefit.

Exner's scoring system checks every aspect of the answer - from how many spots are used, to what history is associated with the answer (if provided by the answerer), to the level of detail and type of content of the answer. The assessment begins by examining the quality of the response's elaboration—in other words, how well it is constructed and whether the response is routine, vague, or arbitrary.

The basis of evaluation is related to the encoding of the response in accordance with all the characteristics of the spot that are involved in the formation of the response.

The following characteristics are encoded:

Form.
Movement - whether movement appears in the response.
Chromatic color is when the response uses color.
Achromatic color - when the answer uses only black, white, or gray.
Halftone texture - when the response uses texture.
Halftone dimension - when the answer uses dimensions related to semitones.
Halftone scattering is when halftones are used in the answer.
Shape dimension - when the answer uses dimensions other than halftones.
Pairs and reflections - when the answer uses pairs or reflections.

Because many people give complex and detailed answers to the question of what they see in spots, the scoring system uses the concept of "mixtures" to account for complex answers. These mixtures take into account multiple objects or the method used to describe an object.

Organizational response activity assesses how well the response is organized. Finally, it performs an assessment of shape quality - that is, how well the answer matches the spot itself (depending on how the person taking the test describes it). If the spot looks like a bear, and the person describes it as a bear, then it may have an "ordinary" form quality - quite acceptable, but not showing much creativity or originality.

There are, of course, many popular responses to spots that resemble objects or creatures real life. The Exner scoring system takes this into account by providing extensive tables for each card containing common responses and how they can be coded.

Pictures of Rorschach "blots"

Interpretation of the Rorschach test

After the responses to each card are correctly coded by the psychologist, an interpretive report is formulated based on the response ratings. This report combines the results obtained from all test answers so that the combined answer cannot distort the test results.

First, the psychologist checks the adequacy of the test, resistance to stress, and the amount of resources available to the person taking the test, comparing them with the requirements imposed on the patient at this time.

Next, the psychologist must examine the individual's cognitive functioning, accuracy of perception, flexibility of ideas and attitudes, ability to calm and control one's emotions, goal orientation, self-esteem and interests, as well as the relationship of these aspects with others.

There are also a number of special indices used less frequently to determine suicidal tendencies, schizophrenia and other deviations. Typically, all of this can be more quickly assessed during a clinical interview, but the Rorschach test can help identify areas of concern in the patient when some questions remain.

VIDEO: Rorschach takes the Rorschach test

A short clip from the film "Watchmen" about a movie character named Rorschach, who takes a Rorschach test during interrogation by the criminal police.

About the events in the hero’s life that changed his psychology as a person for the worse and about his associations on the Rorschach test.

Conclusion

The Rorschach test is not a magical way to peer into a person's soul. It is simply an empirically validated method of projectively measuring personality characteristics.

It is backed by nearly four decades of modern research (following the previous four decades of its existence since it was first published in 1921).

By answering questions about what they see in a simple set of ten inkblots, people can often reveal a little more information about themselves than their conscious self might intend. This leads to a deeper understanding internal motivations human behavior and the emergence of existing problems.

Psychodynamic Rorschach inkblot test- projective methodology for personality research. Created in 1921 by Swiss psychiatrist Hermann Rorschach. In terms of its popularity in psychodiagnostic personality studies, this test occupies a leading place among other projective techniques (the bibliography includes about 11,000 works).

Rorschach selected 10 inkblots and published them in 1921 along with instructions for use in clinical assessment.

In Russian psychology, the Rorschach test was used primarily in clinical and psychological studies of personality (L.F. Burlachuk, 1979; I.G. Bespalko, 1983, etc.). There are a number of studies on the use of the Rorschach test in examining depressed patients, with MDP, brain tumors, epilepsy, in children, and in senile patients. Significant work has been done to standardize the test (B. I. Bely, 1982; I. G. Bespalko, 1983).

The stimulus material for the test consists of 10 standard tables with black-and-white and color symmetrical amorphous (weakly structured) images (the so-called Rorschach “spots”).

Each answer is formalized using a specially developed symbol system into the following five counting categories:

localization(choose to answer the entire image or its individual details);
determinants(to form the answer, image shape, color, shape together with color, etc. can be used;
form level(assessment of how adequately the form of the image is reflected in the answer, using the interpretations received most often as a criterion);
content(the answer may concern people, animals, inanimate objects, etc.);
originality-popularity(very rare answers are considered original, and popular are those that are found in at least 30% of respondents).

These counting categories have detailed classifications and interpretive characteristics. Typically, “total scores” are studied, i.e. sums of similar assessments, relationships between them. The totality of all the resulting relationships makes it possible to create a single and unique structure of interconnected personality traits.

Despite the fact that to this day there is no complete theory linking the features of stimulus interpretation with personal characteristics, the validity of the test has been proven by numerous studies. Special studies of the 80-90s. The high retest reliability of both individual groups of test indicators and the methodology as a whole has also been confirmed (J. Exner, 1980, 1986, etc.). There are known “ink blot” tests, developed on the model of the Rorschach test, and its modifications for conducting group examinations.

Order of conduct

The study should be carried out in a calm and relaxed environment in the absence of strangers. If the presence of a third party is necessary, it is advisable to warn the subject about this and obtain his consent. It is necessary to ensure the continuity of the experiment in advance, to exclude phone calls and other distractions. If the subject uses glasses, care must be taken in advance to have them at hand. The test is best carried out when daylight. In cases where a detailed psychological study is being conducted, it is recommended that the Rorschach test be offered to the subject first.

The experimenter sits at a table at a right angle to the subject or next to him so that he can see the tables at the same time as the subject. The tables are first placed face down to the left of the experimenter.

Before starting the experiment, you need to ask the subject if he is familiar with the technique, has heard or read about it. Before showing the tables in a preliminary conversation, you should establish contact with the subject. It is also extremely important to be aware of the physical (fatigue, illness) and mental state of the subject during the presentation of the tables.

The origin of the tables is usually not explained. If the subject asks whether this experiment is a test of intelligence, the answer should be in the negative, but one can agree with the opinion that the test is a test of fantasy. During the experiment, the subject’s questions should be avoided and their resolution should be postponed “for later.”

Working with the subject consists of four stages:

1) actual execution,

3) use of analogies,

4) determination of sensitivity limits.

1st stage The tables are given to the test subject in the main position, in a certain sequence - according to the number on the back of the table. The subject is asked what the spots remind him of and what they look like. The instructions can be repeated several times. If the subject doubts the correctness of his answers, then he is told that there are no erroneous answers, since all people see different things on the tables. Bohm suggests supplementing the instructions with the following phrase: “You can rotate the tables as you wish.” According to Klopfer et al., comments about rotating tables should not be included in the initial instructions, but when the subject begins to rotate the table, he is not interfered with. We recommend using Bohm's instructions.

Any hint regarding the interpretation of spots should be avoided. Acceptable incentives are: “Yes”, “Excellent”, “See how well you are doing.” If there are difficulties in answering the first table, the experimenter behaves expectantly, but if an interpretation is not given, one must move on to the next table. If there is a long pause after the first answer, they ask: “What else?” You can give several answers."

There is no time limit. It is allowed to interrupt work with one table after 8-10 answers.

All responses of the subject are recorded in the study protocol. Exclamations, facial expressions, behavior of the subject and all remarks of the experimenter are recorded. The position of the table is marked by an angle, the top of which means the upper edge of the table, or by letters: Λ - the main position of the table (a), > - the upper edge of the table on the right (b), v - the table is inverted (c),< - верхний край таблицы слева (d). Локализация ответов описывается словесно или отмечается на специальной дополнительной схеме, где таблицы изображены в уменьшенном виде. Если речь идет не об основном положении таблицы, то обозначения типа «снизу», «сверху», «справа» рекомендуется заключать в скобки. Временные показатели фиксируются при помощи часов с секундной стрелкой; секундомер нежелателен, так как может вызвать экзаменационный стресс.

2nd stage. A survey required to clarify answers. The main orientation of the survey lies in the words: “where?”, “how?” and why?" (“Show me where it is”, “How did you get this impression?”, “Why is this such and such an image?”). In this case, it is better to use the terminology of the subject himself. If, for example, the answer is “a beautiful butterfly,” one might ask what makes the spot look like a butterfly and why it looks beautiful. The wording of subsequent questions will depend on the answers received. You should not use leading questions to inspire the subject with answers that do not reflect his personal perception.

If the subject finds it difficult to verbally indicate the location, he is asked to make a copy of the indicated part of the spot using transparent paper or draw the image he saw. To clarify whether a human image is visible in motion, the experimenter asks the subject to tell in more detail about what he perceived. Questions like: “Are we talking about living or dead?” - not recommended. To find out whether color is used in the answer, ask whether the same image can be seen on reduced achromatic diagrams (see localization tables in Fig. 2.1).

If additional responses are given at this stage, they may be used for the overall assessment, but will not be taken into account in the calculations.

3rd stage. The use of analogies is optional and is used only where the survey did not reveal what features of the spots the subject relied on in his answers. They ask whether one or another determinant (color, movement, shades) indicated in one answer can be applied to other answers. The results obtained are referred to as additional estimates.

4th stage. Determination of sensitivity limits. The richer the initial protocol, the less necessary it is. At this stage, it is determined: 1) whether the subject can see details and integrate them into the whole, 2) whether he can perceive human images and project movement onto them, 3) whether he can perceive color, light and shade and popular images.

The subject's answers are provoked by increasingly specific questions. If the subject gives only complete answers, they say: “Some people can see something in separate parts tables. Try it, maybe you will succeed too.” If the subject finds it difficult to fulfill this request, point to the usual part (D) and ask: “What does this look like?” If this does not help to see the image in the detail of the spot, we can say that some people see “animals” in the side pink areas of the table. VIII and “spiders” in the upper lateral blue spots of the table. X.

If the subject does not give popular answers, then he is shown several popular images and asked: “Do you think this looks like...?”

When there are no color answers in the protocol, it is proposed to divide all the tables into groups according to some criterion. When selecting groups, for example, by content, they are asked to divide the tables again according to another criterion. For the third time, you can suggest dividing the tables into pleasant and unpleasant. If within three Trials the subject does not identify a group of colored tables, it is concluded that he does not respond to the color stimulus.

Encryption of responses

Most domestic authors used two encryption methods. One of them - the “classical Rorschach” - is represented by Bohm’s monograph, the other is the so-called “American school”, most fully described in the works of Klopfer and co-authors. Since there are differences between these two directions, the conclusions of authors using different notations in some cases become difficult to compare.

The Rorschach or "roscharch" is a classic test based on stimulus materials or Rorschach blots.

Rorschach blots - how it all began.

The Rorschach blot technique was founded by the Swiss psychiatrist Hermann Rorschach (1884-1922).

Rorschach discovered that those subjects who see a regular symmetrical figure in a shapeless ink blot usually have a good understanding of the real situation and are capable of self-control.

The online test Rorschach will introduce you to this projective technique using the example of one of the 10 “Rosarch spots”.

Heinrich Rorschach as a child. Humor.

Heinrich Rohrscharch: “Mommy, what do you see in the stain on my T-shirt?”
Rorschach's mom: "Henry! I have at least 45 minutes of washing ahead of me again!”.
Heinrich Rohrscharch: “To decipher these unrealistic fantasies based on repeated emotions, I will have to become a famous psychiatrist. Poor mommy!

What do you see on Henry Rorschach's T-shirt?

Projective Rorschach test online.

Look at the picture - a Rorschach blot - and notice the emotion that arises and the first free association , which arises in you in response to the Rorschach stimulus.

For example, “anxiety” and “the skeleton of the face of some animal.”

Then mark your answer in the survey and only then read the transcript of Rorschach’s technique.

Mark the first association that comes to your mind.

Deciphering Henry Rorschach's projective technique.

The meaning of associations in response to the Rorschach blot:
6. Two bears are dancing on the fountain. Quite rare, but not an isolated association. May indicate schizophrenia and the disease schizophrenia. In no case Rorschach test online cannot make a diagnosis, moreover, such a serious one as schizophrenia. The two bears on the fountain can be seen by both schizophrenics and simply people with a well-developed imagination. Most likely you are one of the latter.
7. I don’t see any stains or marks. Most likely, pop-up windows and images are disabled in yours. Connect this plugin and take the Rorschach test again.

Other associations are considered individually and require special interpretation.

The meaning of the emotional response to the image of the rosharch spot:

Anxiety- You are afraid or worried about something, you are susceptible to phobias, anxious thoughts or. You urgently need a consultation with a happiness psychologist.

Anger- Perhaps now you are going through not the best times. has enveloped your body in a hoop of tension and is holding you back from decisive action.

Happiness- You and confident man and no techniques will change your positive attitude and outlook on the world.

Share the projective Rorscharch test online:

What associations do the icons at the top evoke for you?

Projective methodology for personality research. Created in 1921. In terms of its popularity in psychodiagnostic personality research, this test occupies a leading place among other projective techniques (the bibliography includes about 11,000 works).

The stimulus material for the test consists of 10 standard tables with black-and-white and color symmetrical amorphous (weakly structured) images (the so-called Rorschach “spots”).

The subject is asked to answer a question about what, in his opinion, each image looks like. A verbatim record of all the statements of the subject is kept, the time from the moment the table is presented to the beginning of the answer, the position in which the image is viewed, as well as any behavioral features are taken into account. The examination ends with a survey, which is carried out by the experimenter according to a certain scheme (clarification of the details of the image for which associations arose, etc.). Sometimes the procedure of “determining limits” is additionally used, the essence of which is to directly “call” the subject to certain reactions/answers.

Each answer is formalized using a specially developed symbol system according to the following five counting categories:

1) localization(choose to answer the entire image or its individual details);

2) determinants(to form the answer, image shape, color, shape together with color, etc. can be used;

3) levelforms(assessment of how adequately the form of the image is reflected in the answer, using the interpretations received most often as a criterion);

5) originality-popularity(very rare answers are considered original, and popular are those that are found in at least 30% of respondents).

Basic theoretical settings Rorschach were as follows.

If a person operates on the entire spot, it means that he is able to perceive basic relationships and is prone to systematic thinking. If he fixates on small details, it means he is picky and petty; if he fixates on rare details, it means he is prone to the “extraordinary” and is capable of keen observation. Answers to White background, according to Rorschach, indicate the presence of an oppositional attitude: in healthy people - a tendency to debate, stubbornness and self-will, and in mentally ill people - about negativism and oddities in behavior. In all these interpretations, there is a tendency towards direct analogies and the idea of \u200b\u200bthe uniqueness of the way of seeing and the nature of thinking. You see every little thing - that means you’re a pedant; you see not the spots themselves, like most people, but the adjacent white background - that means you’re thinking unconventionally.

The ability to clearly perceive the shape of spots was considered by Rorschach to be an indicator of stability of attention and one of the most important signs of intelligence. Responses based on movement, arising with the assistance of ideas about movements previously seen or experienced by the subject himself, he considered as an indicator of intelligence, a measure inner life(introversion) and emotional stability. He regarded a large number of color responses as a manifestation of emotional lability.

Rorschach called the relationship between responses based on movement and color “a type of experience.” He associated the predominance of movement responses with the introversive type of experience, and the predominance of color responses with the extratensive type. He saw the main difference between introversion and extratension in its greater dependence on internal experiences than on external impressions.

Giving Special attention characteristics of the perception of spots, Rorschach dwelled relatively little on what kind of objects were seen in them. He believed that the content of the answers only accidentally reflected the experiences of the subjects.

Despite the fact that to this day there is no complete theory linking the features of stimulus interpretation with personal characteristics, the validity of the test has been proven by numerous studies. Special studies of the 80-90s. high test-retest reliability has been confirmed both individual groups of test indicators and the methodology as a whole (J. Exner, 1980, 1986, etc.). The development of the Rorschach test led to the emergence of six the most famous in world psychodiagnostic practice schemes for analyzing the results obtained, which have both formal and interpretative differences. There are known “ink blot” tests, developed on the model of the Rorschach test, and its modifications for conducting group examinations.

The role and significance of the Rorschach test

Unlike all previously existing psychological methods, subjects in this test give their answers independently, and do not choose them from those prepared in advance by the experimenter. Under these conditions, responses depend to a much greater extent on the innate characteristics of perception and individual past experience than on the external stimuli specified in the experiment. Such techniques were later called personality ones, and the Rorschach test was the first among them.

The interpretation of inkblots was studied before Rorschach, but was limited mainly to the content side of the answers. Rorschach for the first time moved from analyzing the content of answers to the mechanisms of their occurrence. He considered the main thing not what exactly a person sees, but how he sees and what features of spots (color, shape, etc.) he uses.

In the ten tables he proposed, Rorschach managed to create such a combination of spots that allows an almost innumerable number of ways to highlight different areas in them, relying either on the shape, then on the color, then on the shades of the spots, or on the outlines of the areas of white adjacent to the spots background, then the combination of all these methods of perception.

Rorschach was able to formalize responses to blots, introduced quantitative criteria, and studied the peculiarities of interpreting blots in 405 subjects, among whom were both healthy individuals of various age groups and patients with various mental illnesses. He noticed that certain categories of answers are combined with certain personality traits and that the nature of the interpretations can roughly assess the degree of intelligence of the subjects. He showed how the responses of healthy people differ from the interpretations of mentally ill people, and described the methods of interpreting tables characteristic of schizophrenia, congenital and acquired dementia, epilepsy and manic-depressive psychosis.

Rorschach was unable to propose a theory explaining the connection between the characteristics of the perception of spots and certain personal characteristics. All his interpretations were empirical in nature and were often based on the principle of analogies and “common sense.” But he managed to create an almost universal test, capable of providing a large amount of original and new information about almost any homogeneous group of subjects. He was able to do so much in creating this extraordinary and amazingly versatile research apparatus that in the seven decades that have passed since his death, the test has not changed in its core, only small additions have been made to it.

Dissemination of the methodology.

After Hermann Rorschach's death, his test gradually became widely accepted. In Switzerland, this test was carried out by Zulliger, Binder, Meili-Butler, in France by Losli-Usteri, in Denmark Bohm's manual was republished many times.

This technique is most widespread in the United States, where a number of directions and schools have appeared. Klopfer took the leading position among American Rorschachists. He developed a detailed system of questioning and rating responses, introduced new symbols and terms, and introduced a number of interpretative innovations; in 1939 he opened the Rorschach Institute, where psychologists, psychiatrists and sociologists worked. Special three-year courses for teaching the test were created, where a diploma was issued only after a certain practice (at least 25 own observations) and an exam. A special magazine dedicated to this technique began to be published.

Other major American Rorschachists include Beck, Hertz, Rapaport, and Ford. All of the listed researchers approached the test from a psychoanalytic position (this applies least of all to Beck). Piotrowski, on the contrary, was interested primarily in the perceptual characteristics of responses and admitted that the use of the Rorschach test is comparable to any personality theory. Shekhtel in his book made many subtle observations regarding the interpretation of a number of response categories. Aronov and Reznikov devoted their monograph to the substantive aspects of the technique. Frank, in a series of articles published from 1976 to 1979, discussed the validity of a number of Rorschach hypotheses.

During the period when the Rorschach test was in its heyday, it was widely used in the armed forces of the United States, Canada, England and Germany to identify people unfit for military service and for promotion to leadership positions in the army and in industry. In 1960, the Rorschach test took first place among all psychological techniques in terms of prevalence. However, after the appearance of a number of articles criticizing certain theoretical principles of the test, interest in it gradually began to decline. If in 1954, references to publications on the Rorschach test accounted for 36.4% of references to all psychological literature, then in 1968 the number of such references dropped to 11.3%.

In Russian psychology, R. t. was used primarily in clinical and psychological studies of personality (L. F. Burlachuk, 1979; I. G. Bespalko, 1983, etc.). Over the past 20 years, a number of studies have appeared on the use of the Rorschach test in the examination of depressed patients, with MDP, brain tumors, epilepsy, in children, and in senile patients. Came out statistical work in the localization category, a number of theoretical articles. Three master's theses on the Rorschach technique were defended, two monographs and methodological recommendations were published. The technique was included in the program of university psychology departments. Significant work has been done to standardize the test (B. I. Bely, 1982; I. G. Bespalko, 1983).

Order of conduct.

The study should be carried out in a calm and relaxed environment in the absence of strangers. If the presence of a third party is necessary, it is advisable to warn the subject about this and obtain his consent. The continuity of the experiment should be ensured in advance, telephone calls and other distractions should be excluded. If the subject uses glasses, care must be taken in advance to have them at hand. The test is best carried out in daylight. In cases where a detailed psychological study is being conducted, it is recommended that the Rorschach test be offered to the subject first.

Working with the subject consists of four stages: 1) the actual execution, 2) questioning, 3) the use of analogies, 4) determining the limits of sensitivity.

1st stage. The tables are given to the test subject in the main position, in a certain sequence - according to the number on the back of the table. The subject is asked what the spots remind him of and what they look like. The instructions can be repeated several times. If the subject doubts the correctness of his answers, then he is told that there are no erroneous answers, since all people see different things on the tables. Bohm suggests supplementing the instructions with the following phrase: “You can rotate the tables as you wish.” According to Klopfer et al., comments about rotating tables should not be included in the initial instructions, but when the subject begins to rotate the table, he is not interfered with. We recommend using Bohm's instructions.

There is no time limit. It is allowed to interrupt work with one table after 8-10 answers.

2nd stage. A survey required to clarify answers. The main orientation of the survey lies in the words: “where?”, “how?” and why?" (“Show me where it is”, “How did you get this impression?”, “Why is this such and such an image?”). In this case, it is better to use the terminology of the subject himself. If, for example, the answer is “a beautiful butterfly,” one might ask what makes the spot look like a butterfly and why it looks beautiful. The wording of subsequent questions will depend on the answers received. You should not use leading questions to inspire the subject with answers that do not reflect his personal perception.

If additional responses are given at this stage, they may be used for the overall assessment, but will not be taken into account in the calculations.

The subject's answers are provoked by increasingly specific questions. If the subject gives only complete answers, they say: “Some people may see something in certain parts of the table. Try it, maybe you will succeed too.” If the subject finds it difficult to fulfill this request, point to the usual part (D) and ask: “What does this look like?” If this does not help to see the image in the detail of the spot, we can say that some people see “animals” in the side pink areas of the table. VIII and “spiders” in the upper lateral blue spots of the table. X.

If the subject does not give popular answers, then he is shown several popular images and asked: “Do you think this looks like...?”

Encryption of responses.

The encryption methods used in this work were based on the Klopfer system as the most developed (most of the examples in this chapter are taken from the manual by Klopfer et al. This system was supplemented with some provisions taken from other authors.

Determining the answer

Answers are considered to be statements that the subject himself evaluates precisely as an answer, and not as a remark or comment. (Hereinafter: E. - experimenter, I. - subject.)

Table X.“There’s a sense of balance here.”

E. “Do you consider this a remark or a response, like the “spiders” you saw here?

I. “This is the answer... They are all in balance.”

Estimate W mF Abs. 0.5

Comments are not considered an answer.

Table VII. “This table gives the impression of something furry.”

E. “When you mentioned the general “fur impression,” did you mean a response or a remark?”

I. “It was a remark.”

E. “Could this be a piece of fur?”

I. “No...”

If the subject considers the naming of the color (for example, Table IX: “Here is red, green, yellow”) as the answer, it is encrypted:

W Cn (color naming) Color 0.0

If the subject does not consider his statement to be an answer, it is designated C des (color description) and is not encrypted.

Two or more responses to the same spot are coded separately unless the subject subsequently rejects one of them or says that they are different descriptions of the same image.

Table V. "Butterfly. Bat".

E. “Do you think it’s a butterfly or a bat, or maybe it’s both?”

I. “It’s more likely a bat.”

That's one answer.

Table V.“By the wings and legs it is a bat, and by the antennae it is an insect.”

These are two answers.

If a subject connects two or more responses with the word “or,” they are all encrypted separately. If a subject replaces one answer with another and uses different determinants, then the rejected answer is taken into account only in additional assessments. If an answer is given as a question or rejected without replacement, it is also scored as optional.

E. “Which part of the spot did you use for this answer?”

I. “I meant a whole spot, but now it doesn’t seem like an animal skin to me. I don't know why I said that."

Table VI.“It could be an animal skin.”

Estimation (W Fc Aobj P 1.0).

Here the brackets mean that all elements must be classified as optional. If localization is difficult, such additional answers should be completely excluded from the rating system.

When the subject corrects his answer spontaneously, this is considered an elaboration of the original answer. Such developments (specifications) should be distinguished from individual responses. Specifications are considered to be elements that form essential parts of the seen image. For example, legs, arms, and head belonging to the same person are not scored as separate responses. The main criterion that distinguishes a specification from an answer is that it cannot be seen when taken separately, on its own. "Hats" can be considered as specifications of "heads", although they can be seen separately. "Rivers" and "forests" are specifications of "landscapes". When in the upper-central dark areas of the table. X see “two animals gnawing on a tree,” then “tree” should be considered a specification. On the other hand, the “butterfly” or “bow” seen in the table. III, and “spiders” or “caterpillars” on table. Xs are so often seen separately that they are judged as independent interpretations, even when they are part of a more complex answer.

With a “dense organization” of interpretations, individual parts are not regarded as independent answers unless they relate to popular images.

Table I."Three dancers. Two men in cloaks and hoods circle around a woman in the center with her arms raised. The woman is wearing a transparent shirt.”

This “dense organization” cannot be broken down into its component parts. Rating W M Fc H 4.5 Table VIII."A multi-colored shield with animals standing on their hind legs."

Here, despite the “dense organization”, animal images are among the popular answers and are therefore evaluated separately.

W Fc Ernbl 2.0 D FM (A) P 1.5

A parenthesis indicates a relationship between responses.

With “free organization”, individual parts receive an independent localization assessment. If they are only mentioned in the survey, they receive extra credit.

Table VIII.“These are underwater creatures and corals. Green and pink are water and flowers. Sea lizards are climbing on the sides.”

W CF N 0.5 D FM A 1.5

Table IX."Marine". (When surveyed, “crayfish claws” and “oyster shell” are indicated.)

Add. 1 D Fc Ad 1.0

Add. 2 D Fc" Aobj 1.0

In cases where relatively shapeless determinants are part of a larger response characterized by good shape, they are not separately encrypted.

Table III.“Two natives are beating a drum; Smoldering embers fly out of the ashes left after the fire.”

W M CF Fc Fc" mF H ire P O 4.5

Here, the ember response to the red parts would not have arisen if it had not been subordinated to a holistic organization. Therefore, the use of color is not reflected in a separate rating, but in an additional one.

Each answer receives five ratings: by localization of the image, by determinants, i.e. those features of the spot on which the subject relies when giving an answer, by content, by the degree of originality of the answer and by the level of form.

Localization of responses

Holistic answers. When the entire table is interpreted, the answers are called holistic and are designated W (from the English Whole). Among them, four groups are distinguished: W, W, DW and WS.

An example of a holistic answer W for the table. I can be either a “bat” or the “three dancers” described above. The first answer is simple, the second is simultaneous-combinatorial. Both of them reflect an instantaneous act of perception.

The successive-combinatorial holistic response does not arise at first glance, but gradually. One image follows another until they come together. For example, on the table. III: “Two people stand bent over. They are boiling something in a cauldron... The red is discarded bones.”

The answer is denoted as W also in cases where, when using the entire spot, individual small parts of it are ignored. If one symmetrical half is considered as a reflection of the other, this is also a holistic interpretation. It is more difficult to evaluate the answer in cases where it focuses on one half of the table, but says about the other: “It’s the same.” Bohm does not consider such answers to be holistic, unlike Klopfer and co-authors, who propose to evaluate them as holistic. Bohm's point of view seems more justified to us.

Where only part of the spot is clearly perceived, but the subject tends to use the whole spot (these responses should be distinguished from confabulatory ones), the symbol “W” is used, indicating a tendency towards the whole.

Table VIII. "Mice climbing the wall."

E. “Where is the wall?”

I. “Here” (points to the middle part).

E. “What makes it look like a wall?”

I. “Precisely that they are climbing on it.”

D W F M A R 1.5

An additional assessment of W (D W) will also be given in cases where a holistic answer is indicated for the first time not during the actual execution, but at the interview stage, or when the subject refuses the initially expressed holistic answer.

Table I."Wings of the Bat"

I. “At first I saw only the wings, now I see that the whole spot looks like bat».

D W F A P 1.0

The truncated W (cut-off Whole) is used in cases where the subject uses almost the entire spot (at least 2/3 of it) and indicates that he is omitting some elements that do not correspond to the concept of the image. Often the red parts in the table are excluded. II and III. The subject must spontaneously mention any missing parts of the spot. If the fact of non-use of some parts is revealed only during a survey in response to questions like: “Did you use this part?”, then such answers are scored as regular W.

Confabulatory holistic DW responses. In these cases, one detail is clearly perceived, and everything else is thought of as a whole without taking into account the configuration of the entire spot or the location of individual parts relative to each other. Examples are “butterfly” (in Table VI) due to the “antennae” located at the top, or the response “thorax” (in Table VIII) resulting from judging the blue squares as “lungs”.

DW's answers are always poorly formulated. Some authors propose to consider interpretations not only with a bad form (DW-), but also with a good one (DW+) as confabulatory. This does not correspond to the point of view of Rorschach and most other researchers, who considered confabulatory responses as an important pathological sign. Therefore, complete images with good shape, based on the initial highlighting of any detail, should not be assessed as DW+, but simply as W+.

Holistic responses that take white spaces into account, such as the “mask” in the table. I are rated as WS.

Answers to the usual details. The parts of the spot that are easily visible and most often perceived are called common parts. Images built from them are designated D. Most Ds are large fragments, but small details also fall into this category if they have a distinct shape and are immediately noticeable. (American authors distinguish such small, but quite often perceived details into a special variety of ordinary details, designated by the symbol d). Rorschach did not indicate the frequency of responses sufficient to identify D. Lepfe proposed that those parts of the spots for which at least 4.5% of responses are given be classified as them. Beck and I.G. Bespalko used a 2% release level of D in their works.

In view of the dependence of the perception of Rorschach tables on the ethnic factor noted by many researchers, Losli-Usteri recommended the compilation of localization maps for each country separately. In our country, such work was carried out by I. G. Bespalko. Below is the list D he compiled, and in Fig. 2.1 - localization tables.

Table I.

1. The entire middle area (“beetle”, “man”).

2. The entire side section (“mythical animal”),

3. Upper half of the lateral area (“dog’s head”),

4. The lower half of the lateral area without clear external boundaries; the choice of this area occurs not due to the external boundaries, but due to the texture (“head of a teddy bear”, “head of an eagle owl”).

5. Side contour of the lower half of the side area (“doll profile”).

6. The most pronounced lateral protrusion (“wing”),

7. Upper central claw-like protrusions (“fawn horns”).

8. Upper half of the central area (“crab”).

9. The dark part of the lower half of the central region (“hips”),

Table II.

1. The entire dark area (“bears”).

2. Lower red spot (“butterfly”).

3. Intermediate white central spot (“spinning top”),

4. Upper red areas.

5. Upper-central conical area (“rocket”, “castle”, “knight”),

6. Lower lateral protrusion (“rooster’s head”),

Table III.

1. Everything is dark (“two people”).

2. Upper-lateral red spots (“monkeys”).

3. Central red spot (“butterfly”),

4. Lower-lateral oblong areas (“fish”; in concept D1 - “people’s legs”),

5. Central-lower dark rounded areas (“black heads”).

6. The entire lower dark center.

7. “Head and torso of a person” from D1 (“man”; in the c-D1 position - “bird”),

8. The entire gray center of the lower central dark area of D6.

9. “Human Head” from D1.

10. The lower part of the “human torso” (in the b-position - “mouse head”).

11. "One of the people."

12. Lower endings D4 (“high heels”, “hooves”).

Table IV.

1. Central lower region (“head of the cochlea”).

2. Inferolateral protrusion, outer part of the light gray area (“dog’s head”, “profile of a man with a forelock”).

3. The entire lower-side part (“boot”).

4. Upper oblong protrusion (“snake”, “roots”).

5. The entire lower side light gray area, the light part of the “boot” (in the b-position - “dog”).

6. Dark in the “boot” (“walrus”).

7. A small protrusion at the top of the spot (“clown profile” in b-position, “gymnast’s head” in D8).

8. The entire upper lateral projection, including D4, as well as its dark base and connecting stripe from the base to D4 (“bird’s head”).

9. The entire central dark stripe (“spine”),

10. The entire upper half of the spot (“dog’s head”).

11. The uppermost central light area, taken either as a whole (“human head”), or only in its protruding part (“flower”).

Table V

1. Lower central oblong protrusions (“snakes”),

2. Lateral area, including about a third of the “wing” and the outer side protrusions (“ham”, “running animal”),

4. Central upper area (“hare’s head”),

5. Half of the entire spot or almost the entire half (“wing”),

6. The entire center (“hare”),

7. Upper protrusions (“rabbit ears”).

8. The outermost superior lateral process (“leg”).

9. The upper contour of the wing (“profile”) with the possible inclusion of lateral processes D3, forming a beard or horns of the profile.

10. Lower contour of the wing (“profile in a high cap”),

Table VI.

1. The entire lower part (“skin”),

2. The entire upper part (“bird”).

3. One of the halves of the lower part (“head with a long nose”; in the d-position - “iceberg”),

4. Upper projections on D2 (“bird wings”).

5. The uppermost part of the spot in the form of a rounded protrusion with thin lines (“whiskers”) extending from it on the sides or without them (“snake’s head”).

6. The upper central oblong part, remaining from the two, after excluding the lateral D4 (“wings”).

7. Lower central small projections, two central and two slightly lateral (“flower organs”, “insect mouth”).

8. Large side protrusion (“walrus head”),

9. The entire dark central stripe, starting from the very top (“spine”).

Table VII.

1. Middle area (“monster head”),

2. One or both upper areas with or without the uppermost projections ("hairstyles") ("women's heads"),

3. The upper or middle areas as a whole (in the d-position - “dog”).

4. The entire lower area with or without indication of the dark center (“butterfly”),

5. Intermediate white area ("head in a three-cornered hat").

6. Dark lower central part with or without an underlying gray central area (“man”, “well section”).

7. The uppermost protrusion (“cat’s tail”).

8. One of the symmetrical halves of the entire lower area D4 (“chess knight”).

9. Small light gray pointed projections on the top area (“icicles”).

10. The lowest light gray center, taken independently, i.e. outside D6 (“dog’s head”).

Table VIII.

1. Lateral pink areas (“walking animal”).

2. The entire lower orange-pink center (“butterfly”, “flower”).

3. The upper gray-green conical part (“mountain”) with the possible addition of a central dark stripe and underlying blue squares (“spruce”),

4. A light skeletal formation between blue squares with the possible inclusion of overlying and underlying central dark stripes (“spine”, “chest”).

5. Blue squares, one or both.

6. Most lateral projections on D2 (“dog’s head”).

8. Top pink half D2.

9. The apical part on D3 (two pointed protrusions at the very top of the table - “two people from afar”, “beak”).

Table IX.

1. One of the symmetrical green areas.

2. One or both top orange areas.

3. The entire central light area with or without the inclusion of the central stripe and two eye-like spots (“dress”, “violin”),

4. Only the side parts of the lower pink area (“human head”),

5. The entire central line or only part of it, enclosed in area D3, but called independently (“fountain”, “cane”),

6. The entire lower pink area (“clouds”, “swaddled baby”),

7. Largest brown protrusion on the medial side of D2 (“crayfish claws”).

8. The entire branched brown on the medial side of D2 (when isolated, the response must include at least two of its three constituent protrusions - “deer antlers”, “two people and a tree”).

9. A small area in D1, partially bordering D2 ("moose head").

10. Pinkish area together with the central stripe (i.e. D6 and D5 taken as a whole; in the c-position - “tree”).

11. Both green halves taken as a whole (“pelvic bones”).

12. Central light round area (lower part of D3) with or without two spots resembling eyes (“owl heads”) included in it.

13. Orange top and green middle areas as a whole (D1 + D2).

14. The uppermost of the three protrusions included in D8 (in the d-position it resembles a “key” or “boot”).

Table X

1. Upper lateral blue spots (“crab”),

2. Lower green oblong areas without a center uniting them (“caterpillar”),

3. Dark dense areas at approximately the middle level of the map outside the pink areas (“bug”), sometimes including a dark spot associated with the main area in a yellow adjacent spot (“doe”).

4. The lower central small part is light green with or without the inclusion of lateral dark dots (“rabbit’s head”, “little man”).

5. Inner yellow areas (“amoeba”, “sitting dog”),

6. One or both upper-central dark areas (“insects”).

7. All dark top center.

8. Large oblong pink areas.

9. Small blue areas on the inside of the pink spots with or without a small blue spot uniting them (“climbers”)

10. Lower outer brown spots (“shaggy dog”),

11. Small, centrally located slingshot-shaped part of the orange center (“cherry”).

12. Green upper spots (“grasshopper”).

13. The entire green lower horseshoe-shaped area, i.e. D2 + D4, taken as a whole (“lyre”).

14. The uppermost dark central “pillar” (“chopped trunk”).

15. Yellow side areas (“autumn leaves”).

16. Both pink parts together with the top dark center with or without the inclusion of the dark center pillar D14.

17. The upper white central area, bounded by pink areas) on the sides and blue D9 below with or without the inclusion of the D1 located inside it (“white owl”, “turtle”).

18. The entire intermediate area between the elongated pink areas includes the colored areas located in it, forming the eyes (D5), mustache (D13), etc. (“human face”, “goat head”).

If we compare the list of D-answers from I. G. Bespalko and Klopfer et al., we can note that in their main features they coincide. Of the 108 D-answers given by I. G. Bespalko, 90, i.e. 83%, are listed 102 D-answers in Klopfer et al. In both cases, the most common, frequently listed answers are the same, so using either list will give approximately the same number of answers to common details. The only fundamental difference is that answers to a white background (D3 on II, D5 on VII, D17 and D18 on X tables) are included by I. G. Beslalko in the category of D-answers due to the high frequency of occurrence, and in Klopfer’s classification co-authors, they are regarded as S-authors.

Sometimes the subject can add to D or, conversely, omit small areas of spots. If such changes constitute an unimportant part of the concept, answers are still scored D. A combination of several normal answers is also scored, unless the combination is unusual.

Answers to unusual details. Those interpretations that are neither holistic nor ordinary and are not responses to white space are scored as responses to unusual details Dd. They are divided into several categories:

a) dd - small or tiny details that are separated from the rest of the spot by space, shades or color;

b) de - edge parts in which only contours are used; most often these are “profiles” or “coastlines”;

c) di - internal details in which the internal shadow part of the spots is used without indicating the edges;

d) dr - unusually demarcated details that do not fall into any of the categories listed above; in size they can be large, close to W, or, conversely, small, approaching dd (unlike dd, their boundaries are controversial). Among them, two types are distinguished: with unusual outlines, not limited by the structural qualities of the spots, and with an unusual combination of D parts.

Bohm's manual uses one symbol, Dd, to represent all of these categories of responses to unusual details.

Answers to white space. In the grading system of Klopfer et al., they are denoted by the symbol S. Bohm suggests dividing them into ordinary DZw and unusual DdZw (here “Zw” from the German “Zwischenfiguren”, similar to the English “S”). Beck, who paid a lot of attention to the frequency assessment of answers, came to the conclusion that the large white spots in tables II, VII and X are true D. According to the above list by I. G. Bespalko, D-answers should include not only interpretations of the indicated Beck high-frequency white details, but also indications of the white central region of the table. X. In our work, responses to areas of white space listed in I. G. Bespalko’s list of D-answers were graded as D, and indications of any other background fragments were graded as S.

Where white spaces are indicated in combination with the main spots, two designations are used to assess localization and the leading one is placed first.

Table VII. “This is an ocean with islands on it” (here “islands” are the whole spot, and “ocean” is the white space around it).

Table I."A mask with holes for the eyes."

Rorschach and Bohm used a special designation for the so-called oligophrenic details - parts of the figure of a person or animal that are given where most healthy subjects easily see the whole person or whole animal. For example, in Table III the subject points not to the figure of the entire person, but to his head or leg. Rorschach initially assumed that such responses were found only in mental retardation and people with low intelligence, but this assumption turned out to be incorrect. Following the American authors, we did not use a special designation for such parts.

Determinants

These include qualitative characteristics of the response in form, kinesthesia, color and light and shade. Only one determinant can be the main one, the rest are considered additional. The first place is given to the determinant emphasized by the subject in the description and development of the answer. A determinant that applies only to part of the indicated spot, for example, in the answer “Bears with red hats,” or is conditional on the clue, is evaluated as additional. In difficult cases, preference is given to the determinant already mentioned rather than to the one that first appeared during the survey. In other cases, kinesthesia is placed first, color second, and texture third. Since shape always occurs in kinesthetic responses and is included in judgments of light and shade and color, it is never taken into account as an additional determinant.

Form F answers. Form assessment is given to all answers where there is no other main determinant (movement, shades, color). This assessment is also applied in cases where the form is imprecise, vague, abstract.

Table I.“Mask” (during the survey, the eyes, nose and cheekbones are indicated).

Table IX.“This is an abstract thing, balance” (when surveyed, it is indicated that this is the answer).

Rorschach distinguished responses with a good form of F+ and with a bad form of F-. He proposed to determine good forms in a statistical manner and classify among them those form responses that are most often given by healthy subjects. “Anything that is better than these formal answers is also rated as F+, everything that is seen less clearly is designated as F-.” Here the word “better” implies a good match between the concept of the image that the subject proposes and the configuration of the spot that he uses.

Among the formed answers with a bad form, a distinction is made between inaccurate F- and indefinite F-. In the former, with a certain statement, there is no resemblance to a spot (for example, the answer “bear” to a spot that looks completely different). Most anatomical answers fall into this category, such as “pelvis” or “chest” in the table. I. In the second case, there is no certainty of reasoning: “Something anatomical,” “Some kind of prehistoric animal.” For geographical answers like “country”, “some archipelago”, when there is no specification, but there is some semblance of an image in the spot, the F± score is used.

If the subject identifies the side spots on the table. VIII as “two animals”, when questioning you should clarify: “What kind of animals are these?” When specifying the answer, F+ is given, otherwise - F-.

An approximate list of good and bad answers, intended for beginning Rorschachists, is available in the monographs of Losli-Usteri and Bohm.

Answers by movement (M). They arise with the assistance of kinesthetic engrams, that is, ideas about movements previously seen or experienced by the subject himself. Often the subject himself makes the appropriate movements with his arms and body. Bohm believes that movement responses are always empathized with by the subjects and there is always identification behind them. He includes not only human movements as kinesthetic responses, but also the movements of anthropomorphic and anthropomorphized animals. Anthropomorphic animals include bears, monkeys, and sloths. But their movements are coded as M only if they resemble human ones. “Bears climbing the wall” on the table. VIII are not coded as M because their movements are not human-like. (It should be noted that American authors evaluate human-like actions of animals not as M, but as FM.) Anthropomorphized animals include popular characters from books and films (Cheburashka, Hare and Wolf from the cartoon “Well, wait a minute!”), whose actions are experienced as humanoid.

M-responses do not always reflect a person in motion. Getting used to a particular body position, for example in the answer “sleeping women,” is also associated with a kinesthetic sensation. M-answers also include indications of parts of human figures visible in action (“two hands with raised index fingers”). American authors also classify descriptions of human facial expressions as M (“someone stuck out their tongue,” “distorted faces”), but a number of authors recommend not classifying such facial interpretations as kinesthetic. According to Schachtel, descriptions of facial expressions do not reflect the projection of one’s own feelings, but the attitude of other people expected by the subject towards him.

In cases where movement or posture appears when questioned in response to leading questions, or is attributed to the human figure expressed in a drawing, caricature or statue, or is noted in tiny human beings occupying an insignificant place in the overall concept, M is given as an additional score.

Animal movements are encrypted as FM.

The movements of inanimate objects (“flying carpet”, “falling vase”) are evaluated with the symbol m.

Answers by color. Depending on the combination with the form, they are encrypted as FC, CF, C.

Shape-color responses FC are noted when shape is dominant and color is secondary, for example, “boiled crayfish” - on yellow spot(Table IX) and “grasshopper” - on the green upper spot (Table X). The response “butterfly” to the central red spot (Table III) is in most cases an F+ response, but the “tropical butterfly” to the same spot is coded as FC. The response "red polar bears" to the side pink areas (Plate VIII) is an F+ response because the color used is not the color of the object in its natural state. (American authors classify such responses as “forced color” and denote them with the symbol F ↔ C.)

FC responses can also be poorly shaped. In this case, the subject names a specific colored object, the shape of which does not correspond to the outline of the spot used.

If the form-color answer applies only to part of the concept (“colored clown hats” in Table II) or if the entire indicated spot is colored, and the color is used only for part of the concept (for example, “roosters” to the upper-lateral red spots of Table III, “ since they have a red crest"), then FC is counted as an additional mark.

CF's color-shape responses are determined primarily by color, while shape recedes into the background and is vague (“clouds,” “flowers,” “rocks,” etc.). Typical CF responses are “guts” or “explosion” in the table. IX. “Ice floes” and “lakes” on blue squares in the table. VIII.

Table VIII. "Corals".

Table VIII, lateral pink area. "Strawberry ice cream".

Primary responses by color C are determined only by color. This is “blood” and “fire” for any red spot, “sky” for any blue spot, “forest” for any green spot. But if there is any form element (“blood stains”, “forest on a geographical map”, “paints on an artist’s palette”), the answer is encrypted as CF.

American authors propose even more stringent criteria for this category of answers and designate with the symbol “C” only those undifferentiated color answers that are repeated several times when presented with tables. They encrypt a one-time response “blood” as CF. Therefore, in their protocols, the symbol “C” is rare and has a special pathological meaning.

If the answer is to name or list various colors, it is encrypted as “color name” - Сn. In this case, the survey should establish that this is a response and not a remark.

Table X.“Here are two blue things, two yellow ones and two red ones.”

E. “Can you tell me anything else about what you see on this table?”

E. “What could it be (upper lateral blue spot)?”

I. “It’s blue.”

Color naming is rare in healthy adults and is more common in epilepsy and organic or schizophrenic dementia.

Achromatic color responses are those where the black, white, or gray portions of the tables are used as color characteristics of the object. They are encrypted as FC", C"F and C" depending on the combination with the form.

Table V."Bat".

E. “What makes her look like a bat?”

I. “She’s black. The ribs holding the wings are visible.”

Table VII."Black smoke".

W K C- Smoke 0.0

Answers on chiaroscuro. The interpretation of darker and lighter shades of gray and chromatic fields by Bohm and by American authors differs significantly from each other. We will first describe in general terms the basic principles of interpretation of shading responses according to Bohm, and then we will examine in more detail the more detailed ways of classifying these responses by American authors.

Bohm divides hue responses into two main groups: F(C) hue responses and Ch chiaroscuro responses. The first are characterized by the fact that subjects within the selected area of the spot highlight each shade and consider first its boundaries, and secondly its color. Often these interpretations are perspectives, for example, in Table. II: “Park alley under bright sun, bordered by dark trees hanging over the alley. The street narrows in perspective and becomes a narrow path in the distance.”

In the answers of the second group, individual shades are not perceived, but there is a general diffuse impression of the perception of light and dark on the table. Depending on the combination with the form, they are encrypted as FCh (“animal skin” on Tables IV and VI), ChF (“coal” on Table I, “X-ray” on Table IV, “storm clouds” on Table VII ) and Ch (“smoke”, “steam”, “dirty snow”, “fog”).

Klopfer et al classify chiaroscuro responses into three main categories: C - hue gives the impression of surface or texture, K - hue gives the impression of three-dimensionality or depth, k - hue gives the impression of three-dimensional space projected onto a two-dimensional plane. Depending on the combination of these categories with the form, different types tint answers.

FC scoring is used where the surface or texture is highly differentiated, or an object that has surface or texture qualities has a specific shape. This includes answers naming animal fur, silk or satin clothing, objects made of marble or steel.

Table VII, middle area. "Teddy bear".

Table II, upper red area. "Red wool socks."

D F C Fc Obj 2.0

Table VI. “Fur rug” (sees fine curls).

The same rating is given for "cellophane transparency", for the luminous effect on a polished surface, for responses where a subtle differentiation of chiaroscuro is used to specify parts of objects, such as facial features, and where it creates a poorly differentiated three-dimensional effect, like a bas-relief. On the contrary, in cases where the difference between surfaces is more emphasized, an “FK” rating is given.

Table I, the entire middle region. "Dancer in a transparent shirt."

The “dummy” response to the same spot (the subject sees the tree through clothing) is scored

since the distance between surfaces is emphasized here.

Table III, light processes in the lower part. “Icicles” (in the survey he indicates that what makes them icicles is the effect of transparency).

dd Fc Icicle 1.5

Table VI, upper central oblong part. “A shiny bedpost with a carved head.”

Table VII, left middle area. “The court clown. He says something funny and evil” (he sees a cap, an open mouth, a lip, teeth).

Table VII."Carved busts of women with feathers on their heads, pointing forward."

W Fc M (Hd) 3.0

Table VIII, central red spot. “Vertebra” (sees shades).

In cases where the effect of texture is denied by the subject or the answer is given along the contours, the Fc rating is not used.

Table VIII, lateral pink areas. “Fur-bearing animals climbing on something” (“furry” because of the irregularity of the outline, in which small standing hairs of fur are seen).

D W F M A R 2.5

This uses an outer line rather than chiaroscuro, and no texture is implied.

The cF estimate is given in cases where the surface effect itself is not highly differentiated. These are vaguely defined pieces of fur, rocks, grass, corals, snow.

Table VI."Rock" (the survey states that it is rough and the color of a rock).

W cF C"F Rock 0.5

Here the effect of texture is combined with an object of indeterminate shape.

A score of c is given in cases where the subject completely ignores any element of the form, focuses only on the surface effect, and repeats this type of response more than twice. Examples of such answers: “snow”, “something metal”. This rare type of tinted responses occurs only in severe pathology.

The FK rating is used when chiaroscuro contributes to the effect of depth. For this, at least three adjacent fields are required, the tint difference of which is used to form the concept. Such responses include bushes and trees reflected in water, views of terrain seen horizontally or from an airplane, and all responses where one object is in front of another and the distance between them is emphasized.

Table II, upper red area. “Spiral staircase” (indicates shades).

The KF estimate is used where a particular form is included in the concept of diffusion.

Table VII."Clouds".

Table VII."Smoke in spirals."

W KF mF Smoke 0.5

If clouds are defined only by vague outlines and no shades are used, the KF score is not applied.

The K score refers to responses of light and dark filling space (e.g., “northern lights” in Table VI), or diffusion without form. Diffusion criterion: it can be pierced with a knife without dividing into parts. These are completely undifferentiated “haze”, “fog”, “smoke” and “clouds”.

The Fk score is used primarily to indicate topographic maps and x-rays when they refer to a specific feature (a country of a particular geographic shape, a chest x-ray with ribs). If the specified part of the map does not belong to a specific country, and certain anatomical structures are not distinguished on the x-ray image, then such answers are encrypted as RF. And finally, if the answer “X-ray” does not imply any shape at all and is given in at least three tables, then such an answer is designated as k.

H - human figures, whole or almost whole,

(H) - human figures devoid of reality, i.e. presented as drawings,

caricatures, sculptures, or as mythological creatures (monsters,

(Hd) - parts of human figures,

A - figure of an animal, whole or almost whole,

(A) - mythological animal, monster, caricature, drawing of an animal,

Ad - parts of an animal, usually the head or paws,

At - human internal organs (heart, liver, etc.),

or lower body,

Obj - objects made by people,

Aobj - objects created from animal material (skin, fur),

Aat - internal organs of animals,

Food - food, such as meat, ice cream, eggs (fruits and vegetables are

plants),

N - landscapes, aerial view, sunset,

Geo - maps, islands, bays, rivers,

Pl - plants of all kinds, including flowers, trees, fruits, vegetables and plant parts, .

Arch - architectural structures: houses, bridges, churches, etc.,

Art- children's drawing, watercolor, where what is painted has no specific

Abs - abstract concepts: “power”, “strength”, “love”, etc.,

Bl - blood,

Ti - fire,

Cl - clouds.

Rarer types of content are indicated by whole words: Smoke, Mask, Emblem, etc.

Originality of answers

According to the frequency of answers, only two extremes are noted: the most common, or popular, and the most rare - original answers. By popular answers, Rorschach meant the interpretations that are given by every third subject. Most authors classify the answers of every sixth subject as popular.

The popularity of answers is largely determined by ethnographic factors, so the lists of R by different authors are somewhat different from each other. Below we present a list of answers obtained by I. G. Bespalko on a sample of 204 adults, indicating the percentage of subjects naming them. His minimum frequency limit P is 16%, i.e. 1/6 of the number of subjects.

Table P-answers %

I 1. Bat (all spot) 38.2

2. Butterfly (all spot) 25.5

3. Beetle (entire central area) 22.5

II 4. Any quadruped in a normal or lateral position 31.5 III 5. Two people (the entire dark area in a normal position). One out of 66.7 “people” is also P

6. Bow tie or bow tie (central red area) 46.1

7. A person or humanoid creature with arms raised (over the entire 20.6 dark area in an inverted position)

8. The front part of an insect, fly, beetle (over the entire dark area 20.6 in an inverted position)

IV 9. Fur skin or fur carpet (all stain) 21.6

V 10. Bat (all spot) 60.8

11. Butterfly (all spot) 48.5

VI 12. Skin, fur clothing, fur carpet (all stain or without top D) 40.2

VII 13. Heads or faces of women (both or one upper area, called 33.3

independently or included in larger localizations)

14. The animal’s head is in the usual table position (in the middle area) 24.5

VIII 15. Any type of mammal (lateral pink areas) 82.4 X 16. Any multi-legged animal: spider, octopus, beetle (upper lateral blue spots) 60.8

17. Hare's head (lower central area light green) 16.2

18. Seahorse inverted (central green oblong areas) 30.0

19. Beetles, insects (two symmetrical central dark spots in the upper central area, taken with or without a trunk-like area uniting them) 17.2

20. Beetle, crab, mite (side dark area on the middle level of the table) 27.5

Original answers occur approximately once per 100 answers in healthy people. Depending on the clarity of perception, the original answers are divided into Orig+ and Orig-. There are originally developed answers and original answers due to the peculiarities of perception. The latter reflect deviations from the usual methods of perception: a mixture of figure and ground is often noted.

Form level assessment

It is obvious that simply dividing answers into popular and original, as well as answers with good and bad form, allows only a very rough assessment of the quality of the answers. It is clear that combinatorial responses to stains, which include both the perception of individual details and their integration into a single concept, are responses of higher quality than popular responses that are simple in structure, where the entire stain or part of it is considered as some kind of undifferentiated unity. But how can we assess the degree of clarity of perception and reflect the level of its differentiation and complexity? Many ways to solve this problem have been proposed.

Beck described the concept of organizational activity (Z), i.e. the ability to perceive the entire spot as a whole, or to see adjacent or separated parts in connection with each other, or to include in the response the white spaces between the spots. The listed signs of organizational activity manifest themselves differently in different tables: for example, it is easy to give a holistic answer to some tables, but it is difficult to compare individual details with each other; to others, on the contrary, holistic answers are rarely given, and individual details are associated with each other without special attention. labor. Beck proposed a conditional scale of points for any manifestation of such activity on each of the tables. His system is of some interest, but it did not solve the problem of assessing the quality of answers.

Friedman proposed to evaluate the level of form depending on the maturity of visual perception, the main features of which - clarity, differentiation and good organization - were formulated by Meili-Butler. Thus, he divided holistic answers with good form into three categories. He classified the best answers (W++) as those perceptions in which a single field on tables I, IV, V, VI, IX was first divided into its component parts and then logically combined into a single, clearly visible answer. Examples of such answers: table. I - “three dancing”, table. V - “donkey with a load on its back.”

In W+ responses, two or more discrete fields separated by white space on Tables II, III, VII, VIII, X are integrated into a single, clearly visible response. For example, table. III - “two people bend over and collect something.”

Answers of type Wm (average) are given to single fields, i.e., to tables I, IV, V, VI, IX, but do not include analysis followed by synthesis. For example, table. I - “butterfly”, table. IV - “animal skin”.

The most successful assessment of the form level proposed by Klopfer et al., who managed to include three different components in it: 1) clarity of answers, 2) their development (specification) and 3) organization.

According to the first component, all answers are divided into clear, vague and fuzzy, corresponding to the concepts of F+, F± and F- in the classical interpretation. Clear answers are those where a concept with a specific shape is applied to a spot whose outline matches the specified shape (e.g., "witch" in orange D of Plate IX matches the outlines of the head, body, and conical hat). In vague answers, the concept itself refers to objects so different in shape ("flower", "cloud", "island") that almost any spot or part of it can correspond to them. Vague answers are those in which the concept of a specific shape refers to a part of a spot with a dissimilar configuration, or the vague concept refers to a spot that has a particularly specific shape. For example, the answer “clouds at sunset” to the side pink areas of the table. VIII should be classified as fuzzy because here the concept of an indeterminate shape (“cloud”) applies to a spot that clearly resembles an animal.

The clarity of the comparison may be improved or impaired depending on the design, or specification, offered to the test taker. Constructive developments indicate a highly differentiated perception. In them, concepts are more carefully compared with the outlines of a spot (indicating, for example, parts of the body of animals and details of clothing in humans) or using determinants (color, shades, movement) combined with good form (FC, FC, FK).

Irrelevant developments do not improve or degrade the clarity of the concept's fit to the spot. For example, table. IX, orange spot: “Witch. Here's her hat. This hat has a pointed top and brim." Here “hat” is a constructive development, and “top” and “brim” are irrelevant, since they relate to the concept of a hat; table III: “Two people bowing to each other. Here are their legs and bowed backs.” Here the posture is already indicated by the fact that people are “bowing”, the rest does not add anything to the answer. Indications of color in objects that do not necessarily have that color (“green jacket”, “red butterfly”), and developments that are purely verbal in nature and do not improve the correspondence of the concept to the spot are also considered irrelevant. Finally, there are developments that weaken or destroy the level of form. For example, on the table. V child 5 years old answers:

“Bat”, but sees legs not only from below, but also from the sides.

Any procedure used by a subject to combine various parts spots into a broader meaningful concept is recognized for increasing the level of form. The interaction of images can manifest itself in movement, position or symbolism.

Form is rated on a scale going from -2.0 through 0.0 to +5.0. Scoring is carried out in two stages: 1) establishing a base score and 2) adding 0.5 points for each constructive development or successful organization and subtracting 0.5 points for each development that degrades the concept's fit to the spot.

A basic score of 1.0 is given for a concept that meets the minimum requirements for a “distinct” answer. There are three types of such responses.

A. Popular answers.

B. Popular level answers, often given to very obvious parts of the spot and requiring approximately the same level of organizational ability as the popular answers themselves:

“Hands” on the upper claw-like protrusions (Pl. I),

“Butterfly” on the lower red spot (Table II),

“Crab” to the lower dark center (Plate III),

“Lungs” on the central red spot (Table III),

“Boots” on the lower lateral parts (Table IV),

"Animal head" on the central lower area (Pl. IV),

"Female leg" on the outermost superior lateral process (Pl. V),

“Butterfly” on the entire upper part (Table VI),

“Animal head” on one of the symmetrical green areas (Table IX).

B. Concepts that require little imagination or organizational ability, regardless of the frequency with which they occur. These concepts include indefinite forms. For example, “butterfly” - for any field with a central narrow small “body” and symmetrical “wings” on the sides, “tree” - for any spot with a narrow “trunk” and a wider part at the top, “spider” or “crab” - on any round spot with processes, “fish” - on any narrow oblong spot.

A core score of 1.5 is given for concepts that exceed the minimum requirements for clarity, i.e., that involve a distinct form. A score of 1.5 usually includes four or more significant form characteristics, while a score of 1.0 only includes three, and sometimes two. For example, a human profile includes at a minimum the nose, mouth, chin and forehead included in one outline. The assessment takes into account not only the complexity of the form, but also the proportions. The human figure includes a long, relatively narrow body, a round, smaller head, legs and possibly arms. The specific shape of the animal "Scottish Terrier" is a more distinct form than just "dog".

The basic score of 0.0 is given to answers that are vague in form. These are quite rare answers: S, Sp, s, S", K, k, etc.

A basic score of 0.5 is given to vague answers where the form is not completely negated. These are the answers F±, CF, C"F, cF, KF, RF. Examples: “leaf”, “island”, “drawing”, “liver”, “lungs”.

The main score of -0.5 is given when an uncertain concept is assigned to a structure-defined field, for example, the central red spot in the table. III is rated as "blood" or "fire".

A basic score of -1.0 is given for a response where the test taker makes some effort to match the concept to the shape of the spot, but does not meet the minimum requirements for doing so. Typically, this assessment is made for confabulatory combinations.

A base score of -1.5 is given to confabulatory responses scored as DW.

A basic score of -2.0 is given to answers in which the concept does not match the spot and no effort is made to match. Many of these responses are perseverations, the shape of which does not correspond to the outline of the spot and for which the subject does not give any explanation.

Each design specification and each design organization adds 0.5 to the base score. Typically, such additions are made to ratings of 1.0 or 1.5, less often - to ratings of 0.0 or 0.5. The upper limit of the rating is 5.0, further specifications do not receive additional points. In this case, the specification: a) should be expressed spontaneously in the answer or in the survey, and not arise in response to leading questions; b) must exceed the essential formal elements of the concept (for example, the answer "bat" includes wings, body and legs, the specifications here would be the division of the wings and the emphasis on dark color); c) must be independent (“eyes” and “eyebrows” are one specification, not two). Only one bonus per answer is given per organization.

For example, table. II: “Two dogs on their hind legs, their noses touching each other.” Basic score 1.0 (popular answer) + 0.5 for pose on hind legs + 0.5 for noses + 0.5 for organization (sees dogs in relation to each other) = 2.5; table II, an intermediate white central spot and a gray area above it: “A big fat white rabbit, and here are his ears.” Basic score 1.5 + 0.5 for “white” + 0.5 for “thick” (“ears” are already part of the rabbit concept) = 2.5.

Each debilitating specification, including a confused organizational element, reduces the core score by 0.5, provided the core score is 1.0 or 1.5. For example, when animals on the table. VIII is assigned a “foreign” color, this reduces the score by 0.5 points. No further subtraction is made from major negative ratings. Often, weakening specifications are mixed with constructive specifications, and the assessment remains at the same level.

For a general assessment of the subject’s abilities, a weighted average assessment of the level of the form is also used. In this case, all scores equal to 2.5 or higher are multiplied by two; all scores below 2.5 are added to them and the resulting amount is divided by the total number of answers. In recordings where there is no large variation in shape clarity, a weighted average shape level of 1.0 to 1.4 represents average intelligence, 1.5 to 1.9 above average intelligence, and a score above 2.0 indicates very high intelligence. With a wide range of scores, determining intellectual level becomes more difficult.

Calculations

The total number of responses R is calculated, on average it is 15-30. The number of responses to the last three tables is calculated separately. They write, for example, “R = 34 (VIII-X = 12).” Normally, the sum of answers to the last three tables is 40% of the total number of answers.

The average reaction time (T1), i.e., the time from displaying the table to the first answer, and the average response time (Tr), which is calculated from the ratio of the duration of the experiment to the total number of answers, are determined. Sometimes these indicators are calculated separately for black and color tables. The average reaction time ranges from 10 s to 1 min, the average response time is about 30 s.

The number of holistic interpretations, responses to ordinary, small and unusual details, the number of shaped, kinesthetic and color responses are separately calculated.

W = 9(7+) (2DW, 2WS),

F = 12 (F+ = 8, F± = 2, F- = 2),

FC = 4, CF = 2, C = 1.

The ratio of H: Hd and A: Ad is taken into account; Normally it is 2:1.

After this, a number of indicators are calculated as percentages. F+% - percentage of responses with a clear form - this is the percentage of clearly visible form responses to the total number of form responses. Only formal responses are taken into account; interpretations based on movement, color and light and shade are not taken into account. Uncertain answers F± are counted as 1/2 answer. For example, F = 40, of which F+ = 28, F- = 8 and F± = 4.

A% (percentage of answers for animals) - the percentage of the sum of whole images and parts of animals (A + Ad) to the total number of answers (R).

P% (percentage of popular answers) - the percentage of popular answers to the total number of answers.

Orig% (percentage of original answers) - the percentage of original answers to the total number of answers.

Sequence, or succession, is the order in which different modes of perception appear when interpreting tables. If the subject on each table first gives a holistic answer, and then moves on to the details, never naming a small detail before a large one, then such a sequence is designated as strict. Such cases are extremely rare. If the answers to all tables begin with W and there are one or two irregularities, then the sequence is said to be ordered. If W follows D-responses more than once, the sequence must be considered free. If the irregularity is so great that no order can be discerned at all, then it is an incoherent, or disordered, sequence. Finally, if the test taker starts most tables with Dd or Do and then moves on to D and W answers, then this sequence is called reverse.

The perception type is the ratio of perception methods in one specific protocol. Rorschach accepted the following ratio as the norm:

8W, 23D, 2Dd and 1S with 34 answers. He called this type W-D. Depending on the predominance of one or another method of perception, one of the letters is emphasized. For example:

10W, 18D, 1Dd = W-D,

6W, 25D, 5Dd = W- D-Dd,

2W, 18D, 12Dd, 4S = D -Dd-S.

10-20% (W) 20-30% W

30 ―45 % W

45-60 % W

>60 % W

55―65 % D

65-80 % D

>80 % D

15―25 % d

25-35 % d

35-45 % d

10-15 % DdS 15-20 %DdS 20-25 %DdS

(As a reminder, “d” are common small-magnitude responses that we recommend including in the D-response category).

Pure D and Dd types are extremely rare, while pure W types are not uncommon. There is a W+ type, where most answers have good shape, and W-type. The latter is a sign of gross pathology. When assessing the type of perception, it is important to consider the total number of responses. A low D% is rare in a long record, but a high Dd% is of particular diagnostic value in a short record.

The most important of the entire calculation is the type of experience: the ratio of responses in movement and color. Each M counts as 1, FC as 0.5, CF as 1, C as 1.5 points. With 3M, 3FC, 2CF, 2C, the formula for the type of experience will be 3: 6.5. There are five types of experience:

1) co-articulated (narrow, compressed), when the numbers on both sides are 0 or 1,

2) coartative (narrowed) - with scores up to 3 on each side,

3) ambiequal - with high and approximately equal scores on both sides (M: C = 5: 6 or 9: 11),

4) introversive - with a predominance of M, for example, 5: 2,

5) extratensive - with a predominance of C, for example, 3:8.

Color type is the distribution of color indices. With the “left” type, FC predominates, with the “middle” type – CF and with the “right” type – C. Here are Bohm’s examples:

left type

medium type

right type

In all the examples given, the “color sum” is six. The Realism Index (RI) is calculated by the frequency of occurrence of four answers: 1) the answer for movement in the table. III in the normal position, 2) “bat” on the table. V in any position, 3) any animal figure on the side pink areas of the table. VIII, 4) any animal figure on the table. X. If one of these answers is given first, it is worth two points, if indicated later, it is worth one point. The maximum possible value of the realism index is eight; normally it ranges from five to seven.

Special phenomena

Since the Rorschach technique is superior to any other test in multiple aspects, except for purely formal data, when using its tables, many more factors that cannot be formally quantified should be taken into account. In the protocol they are usually listed after the calculations under the name of special phenomena. Below we will focus on the most important of them.

Refusals. If it is difficult to give an answer to some table, they try to overcome this delay in the flow of thoughts. They say encouragingly: “You try, don’t rush, you can always find something here.” Failures occur more often on tables II, IV, VI, IX. They can occur with depression, stupor, epileptic absence, with neuroses and psychopathy, but they often occur in healthy people. Patients with schizophrenia sometimes refuse “easy tables” (1, III, V, VIII), while the rest do not cause them any difficulties.

Awareness of interpretation. Healthy subjects usually perceive a discrepancy between the perceived spot and the engram stored in their memory. Psychasthenics and pedants often emphasize that this or that part of the spot only resembles the image they named. In dementia, such awareness of interpretation may be completely absent. Patients are firmly convinced that the spot has a certain meaning and try to guess it. More often there is a decreased awareness of interpretation, which is manifested by questions: “Is this correct?”, “What does this really mean?” Such uncertainty when interpreting tables is observed in a number of mental illnesses, but can also occur in healthy people with certain neurotic traits.

Subjective and objective criticism. The first is expressed by the phrases: “My imagination is not developed enough,” “I should study anatomy.” Such remarks are signs of internal uncertainty and are found in psychasthenics, with neuroses, phobias, schizophrenia and organic brain damage.

Objective criticism more often manifests itself in the form of criticism of the form: “The ears don’t fit here,” “This should be removed.” It indicates caution and timidity, as well as poverty of imagination among pedants and psychasthenics. According to Rapaport et al., expressed criticism of spots (“I don’t like this,” “Stupid picture,” “What do you think about this?”) expresses strong aggressive tension and hostility towards the experimenter, which the subject cannot express directly.

Color shock. By this phenomenon, Bohm understands any distinct disturbance in the smooth flow of associations when color tables are presented. It may manifest itself in refusal, slow reaction time, gestures, facial expressions, negative or positive exclamations, sudden deterioration in clarity of forms, decreased productivity, giving a sexual interpretation as a first response, and other signs. Color shock is considered the most common symptom of neurosis. Due to the fact that this phenomenon is very common and often occurs in healthy people, it has no pathognomonic significance.

Other types of shocks are also described: to red, to dark, to blue, to white, “kinesthetic” shock, but the symptomatic meaning that is attributed to them is either unclear or highly doubtful.

An indication of symmetry. A characteristic sign of internal insecurity for psychasthenics. Stereotypical repetition of remarks about symmetry on most or all tables is characteristic of epileptoids.

Pedantry of formulations. Verbosity, detailed pronunciation with a careful description of details is considered characteristic of patients with epilepsy or epileptoid psychopathy.

Perseverations. Reflections of the inertia of ideas. Bohm identifies 5 types among them:

a) repetition of the same content with two or more consecutive answers; this is the crudest, organic form of perseveration;

b) sticking to the topic, for example, listings: “horse head”, “crocodile head”, “snake head”, etc., there can be several such topics;

c) perseveration of the “chewing” type: the same answers are repeated, but there are many other interpretations between them;

d) perseveration of perception, in which the subject identifies parts that are identical in outline and gives different answers to them;

e) perseveration of a separately picked out part, when the subject uses the same part of the spot and gives several interpretations to it, being unable to tear himself away from the selected part. This weakest type of perseveration occurs in healthy people with epileptoid character traits.

Stereotypy. Preference for one specific category of content. Anatomical stereotypy is found in somatic patients, with hypochondriacal disorders in patients with neuroses and organic brain damage. Rorschach described her as having an “intelligence complex,” i.e. when the subject strives to show his education and erudition. Stereotypy of faces occurs in phobias. Stereotyping of other parts of the body (arms, fingers, legs) is observed with low intelligence, mental retardation and mental infantilism.

Inverted answers(for example, Table VI: “tree upside down”; often found in children). In adults they can be manifestations of infantilism. In pathology they are found in senile dementia, in trauma patients and in patients with epilepsy.

Sexual responses. Rorschach's charts contain a number of details resembling male and female genitalia. Most often, sexual answers are given to the following details: table. I, central apical part (“breast”, “vagina”); table II, inferior red spot (“vagina”), upper central conical region (“penis”); table Ill (“penis” and “breasts” in human figures); table IV, the uppermost central region (“vagina”); table VI, upper central oblong part (“penis”);

table VII, dark lower central part (“vagina”); table VIII, lighter central parts of the base (“vagina”); table X, the uppermost dark central "pillar" ("penis"), The listed answers were included in the list of ten "popular sexual answers" of the Show. According to the observations of Rapaport and co-authors, mentally healthy people often give sexual answers and formulate the latter "technically correctly." Patients with schizophrenic thought disorders are more likely to have vague verbalizations (“the main parts of a woman,” “her private parts”), incorrect terminology, fabricated elaborations, and references to sexual acts.

Bohm considers getting stuck on sexual details or associative stupor when considering them (“I don’t know what it is,” “I can’t figure it out here,” “What could it be”) to be a manifestation of “sexual fear” in neuroses.

Indications of destruction(for example, “a bat with a torn off wing,” a skull in the desert”), aggression (interpretations expressing direct hostility, struggle, conflict, indications of firearms or bladed weapons, explosions, volcanic eruptions, etc.) and anxiety (scary scenes with threats, animals and representatives dangerous to humans evil spirits, indications of darkness and gloom) are considered an expression of hostility and anxiety of the subjects.

Links to yourself. The subjective feeling that the tables or survey have a special relationship to the subject. Bohm defines this phenomenon as the projection of one's own personality onto the interpretation. For example: “It’s me myself,” or when asked to show the “dog’s” nose - “You mean that I’m too big-nosed.” This phenomenon occurs in patients with schizophrenia and epilepsy, as well as in organic dementia. Milder forms are found in neuroses and psychopathy as a manifestation of egocentrism. This phenomenon should be distinguished from reminiscences that can be observed in mentally healthy subjects: “When I was a child, I had a doll that looked exactly the same.”

Blending figure and ground. This phenomenon must be distinguished from those interpretations where white space is perceived as holes or gaps, as color or as an independent contour. Figure-ground mixture responses fall into two categories. In the first case, the figure and the background are at different levels and therefore are separable from each other, for example, a white spot is seen as a lake, and a black spot is seen as the mountains surrounding it. In the second case, dark and white are on the same level and are inseparable from each other. For example, the upper lateral process in the table. IV is regarded as the "head of a gull", and the white part of it is assessed as the white spot on the head of a bird. Such answers are often original in perception and, in good form, are found among artistically gifted individuals, indicating great lability of perception. In pathological cases, confusion of figure and ground has been described in organic brain damage and schizophrenia.

Confabulatory responses. This is the name given to interpretations with poor form, in which the content based on the perception of a small part of the spot is inadequately attributed to the larger field. Such responses can be encrypted by the terms DW-, when an ordinary detail is initially perceived, DdW-, when the proposed concept applies not to the entire spot, but to an ordinary detail. The smaller the initially allocated field and the less significant the initial content for the formation of a confabulatory response, the greater the degree of pathology. If a confabulatory response is based on more than one clearly perceived detail, the response is considered a confabulatory combination.

Some authors propose to consider interpretations not only with a bad form (DW-), but also with a good one (DW+) as confabulatory. This does not correspond to the point of view of Rorschach and most other researchers. As Klopfer et al. and Weiner point out, confabulatory responses always imply a concept with a particular form and are always poorly form responses. Indications of objects of indefinite shape are not considered confabulatory. For example, the answer “crab” in the table. I, resting on the “claws” seen above, is not considered confabulatory, since the shape of the entire spot can be compared to the outline of a crab. The response “cloud” to any spot is also not confabulatory due to the vagueness of the concept.

According to Bohm, many original answers with poor form, which are unmotivated and “pulled out of thin air”, can be considered confabulatory, although they are coded as ordinary W-.

Confabulatory responses are typical for patients with organic brain damage, schizophrenia and for healthy children aged 4-6 years. Rapaport and co-authors noted that confabulatory responses in patients with schizophrenia are very unique and are characterized by a pathological loss of distance from the spot.

Fabulization. Greater affective elaboration or greater specificity of responses than is justified by the actual stimuli.

For example, table. II, white central spot and adjacent dark areas:

lake...dangerous rocks.” Here there is a fabricated element in the word “dangerous”, which is in no way determined by the initial perception. Or the lower red spot of the table. II is defined as "hell". This is where the overly affective development of the response occurs. Fabulizations include responses such as “terrible person”, “threatening pose”, “screaming”, “blazing”, etc. Such responses can occur in sensitive individuals who enjoy the brightness of their own responses. In healthy subjects they are often found when describing facial expressions.

According to Rapaport et al., the presence of even several fabulizations in one protocol is not a pathology, but their abundance indicates autistic thinking. Unlike patients with schizophrenia, healthy people are able to give an account of the eccentricity of their associations when asked about it.

A more pathological version of this phenomenon is extended fabulization, represented not by individual words, but by entire phrases. For example, the answer to table. V: “two people are lying on their backs. This is a man and a woman, they were just intimate and now they are sleeping.”

Symmetry dissociation. Attributing different meanings to identical symmetrical spots. This phenomenon is close to fabulization. For example, table. VII: “these are fairies, good and evil. The good one has a snub nose, and the evil one has a hooked nose.”

Absurd answers. Giving individual spots specific and developed meanings that are extremely far from real stimuli. For example, the answer to two points: “one child is crying and the other is looking at him”;

table III: “human knee”; table VII: “shoe laces.” In all of these answers, the shape of the spot is blatantly ignored.

The described phenomenon is close to fabulizations, but is a more severe pathology. Even the single appearance of such responses indicates a gross disorder of thinking; they are typical for patients with schizophrenia.

Fabulous combinations. Responses with an unrealistic relationship between two or more perceptions based solely on their spatial contiguity. Most often they are expressed in the combination of various parts of living beings into a single chimerical creation. For example, table. IV: “the skin of an animal in boots”; table V: "bat-winged rabbit" or "bird-headed people." Such combinations can be expressed by neologisms: “butterfly-card”, “horse-carriage”. Bohm's opinion regarding the attribution of such responses to contamination seems controversial to us.

Fabulous combinations can be expressed in the form of responses with inadequate activity or in the form of unlikely or impossible combinations: “two chickens rolling balls,” “two elephants standing on two other monks,” “dogs climbing a butterfly,” “a rabbit with worms, crawling out of the eyes” (Plate X, lower green oblong areas with a central part uniting them).

As Rapaport and co-authors note, fabulized combinations are found in protocols of healthy people, but the latter, as a rule, accompany such responses with a smile or appropriate explanations, surprised that such a thought occurred to them. Patients with schizophrenia express fabricated combinations without any criticism. In cases where the subjects’ attitude to such answers is not entirely clear, it is necessary to ask them: “Does this happen?”

Klopfer et al rate the level of form of fabricated combinations extremely low, assigning them the lowest score: -2.0. This point of view seems to us incorrect, since each component of such a combination, as a rule, has a good shape. In these cases, we propose to evaluate the form of each of the components, sum them up and subtract 0.5 points from the resulting figure for an inadequate combination of concepts.

The phenomenon of "transparency". Close to fabulized combinations, when the subject names objects that cannot be seen at the same time, since one of them obscures the other. In such answers, the body is seen through clothing, and internal organs through external tissue, for example, “this is a person, and this part is his heart.” If such responses are not justified by x-rays or anatomical drawings, they indicate a thinking disorder.

Contamination. Complete fusion of two discrete images into a single response. For example, table. III, superolateral red spot: “bloody island”; table IV: “the liver of a respectable employee” (Rorschach example). Sometimes this phenomenon manifests itself in neologisms, for example, “catbird”. Contaminations are extremely rare and always indicate severe thinking disorders. According to Rapaport et al, contamination reflects the fluidity of perceptual boundaries in patients with schizophrenia and their inability to keep emerging images separate from each other.

Autistic logic. Examples of similar answers: “ little lion; it is small, as it occupies only part of the spot”; “two people are over a spirit lamp, they are warming their hands, which means it’s a spirit lamp.” This category of interpretations includes answers by number and position: “angels, because they are above the earth,” “The North Pole, because it is at the top.”

Strange verbalizations. Answers close to autistic logic: “a beautiful dog, the noblest of dogs”, “one of the ilium bones ... the left one”, “the first table reminds me of the anus, and this makes me believe that everything else will be the same.”

Symbolic responses(“good and evil”, “life fights death”). Healthy subjects may use symbolism as a conclusion or addition to an already developed answer. At the same time, they gravitate towards generally accepted color symbolism: blue - coldness, red - anger, black - evil, etc. In cases where the symbolic response is extremely individual, is the only response to the stain or is dominant and is pronounced with confidence in its reality, can be considered a manifestation of a thinking disorder.

Abstractions. “Death”, “autumn”, “gaiety”, indications of numbers, letters and geometric shapes.

Answer Uncertainty. “The tail and hind leg of something diving into eternity, leaving this world and diving into nothingness.” Such answers, like abstractions, are found in patients with schizophrenia.

Ambivalence, or movements with double meaning. Table VII, c-position: “two girls, one of whom invites, and the other refuses.” Such responses are found in patients with neuroses, schizophrenia and schizoid psychopaths.

The Rorschach test or Rorschach inkblot technique is one of the most famous psychodiagnostic personality tests. Each of us has seen at least one picture with blots that resemble... But here, in fact, the test begins, since the answer determines the individual properties and inclinations of a particular person. Recently, due to its massive distribution on social networks, the Rorschach test is often presented in a significantly simplified versions, but in fact it is a powerful psychological tool.

I often glimpsed these pictures and heard about this test, but I didn’t have to take it myself, and even more so I didn’t quite understand the methodology and specifics of this test. Let's all find out about this together now, and at the same time remember about its author and the history of the creation of the Rorschach test

HERMANN RORSCHACH WAS BORN ON NOVEMBER 8, 1884 IN ZURICH (SWITZERLAND). He was the eldest son of an unsuccessful artist, forced to earn a living by giving art lessons at school. Since childhood, Herman was fascinated by color spots (in all likelihood, the result of the creative efforts of his father and the boy’s own love of painting), and his school friends nicknamed him Blob. When Herman was twelve, his mother died, and when the young man turned eighteen, his father also died. Graduated with honors high school, Rorschach decided to study medicine. In 1912, he received his medical degree from the University of Zurich, after which he worked in a number of psychiatric hospitals. In 1911, while still studying at the university, Rorschach conducted a series of interesting experiments to test whether schoolchildren gifted with artistic talents had a more developed imagination when interpreting ordinary inkblots. This research had a huge impact not only on the future career of the scientist, but also on the development of psychology as a science in general. It must be said that Rorschach was not the first to use color spots in his research.

It is clear to say that the Swiss psychiatrist and psychologist Hermann Rorschach came up with the idea of creating such a test - a very difficult task. PhD Jane Framingham, for example, believes that a similar idea could have been inspired by the popular children's game at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries, “Klecksographie” - charades based on inkblots. Rorschach's teacher and friend Konrad Goering could have used inkblots as a psychological tool.

The history of the test itself can begin in 1911, when E. Bleuler first introduced the term “schizophrenia” into scientific use, and G. Rorschach became interested in this disease and devoted his dissertation to its study. During the experimental part, he noticed that patients interpreted the spots from the game “Klecksographie” differently. But then he made only a small report about his observation.

This was followed by several years of practice, during which G. Rorschach actively tested the inkblot technique on his patients in order to determine personal behavioral factors. As a result, 40 cards with inkblots were created and theoretical material was collected to present the methodology. But there were difficulties with publication. It’s hard to believe now, but not a single publishing house of that time wanted to undertake the printing of Rorschach’s book. And the reason for this was not the fantastic or anti-scientific nature of his ideas, but the banal technical difficulty in printing so many blot designs. As a result, they had to be reduced first to 15, and then to 10. Only after this did one of the publishing houses agree to publish the book. It was published in 1921 under the title “Psychodiagnostik”. In it, the author outlined his theory about personal characteristics of people. One of the main points is that each person's personality includes such qualities as introversion and extroversion - in other words, that we are motivated by both external and internal factors. According to the scientist, the inkblot test allows one to assess the relative ratio of these properties and identify any mental deviation or, conversely, strengths personality. The psychological scientific community paid virtually no attention to the first edition of Rorschach's book, since at that time the prevailing belief was that it was impossible to measure or test what a person's personality consisted of. However, over time, colleagues began to understand the usefulness of the Rorschach test, and in 1922, the psychiatrist discussed the possibilities of improving his technique at a meeting of the Psychoanalytic Society. Unfortunately, on April 1, 1922, after suffering from severe abdominal pain for a week, Hermann Rorschach was admitted to the hospital with suspected appendicitis, and on April 2 he died of peritonitis. He was only thirty-seven years old and never saw the enormous success of the psychological tool he invented.

In it, in addition to introducing the concept of “psychodiagnostics” into science, the results of studies with inkblots and the test itself with explanations were presented. Rorschach's own scoring system (in other words, explanations of how to interpret the results obtained) focused on classifying possible answers, and paid minimal attention to their content. IN next year the author of the test died. Despite the weakness of certain aspects of the test (unclearness in which category of the proposed classification all should be classified possible options answer due to the lack of their description in the work), its development for a long time were very highly valued and were the main diagnostic tools in clinical psychology (during the 40-50s of the twentieth century). In the 1960s, the Rorschach test was criticized, mainly due to the lack of a unified methodology for assessing answers (there are several most common scoring systems: Beck, Piotrovsky, Klopfer, etc.).

But complete discredit was avoided. Mainly thanks to the work of John Exner. He compared the 5 dominant evaluation systems and created something like a unifying system (the work “The Rorschach: A Comprehensive System”). Today, many psychologists use the Rorschach test within the framework of Exner's Integrative System. It is used for diagnosis in correctional institutions in the United States and some other countries, in forensic science, and for the diagnosis of personality disorders in clinical psychology. Also, validity in understanding personality and emotional state The test reveals a person in cases where the patient does not want or cannot (due to dementia, for example, as in the case of Charlie Gordon in Flowers for Algernon) talk about it directly. Globally, based on the answers, one can judge a person’s psychology, understand his past and predict future behavior.

Rorschach ink blots

The Rorschach test uses ten ink blots: five black and white, two black and red, and three color. The psychologist shows the cards in strict order, asking the patient the same question: “What does this look like?” After the patient has seen all the pictures and given the answers, the psychologist shows the cards again, again in strict order. The patient is asked to name everything that he sees in them, where exactly in the picture he sees this or that image, and what in it forces him to give exactly that answer. Cards can be turned over, tilted, manipulated in any other way. The psychologist must accurately record everything the patient says and does during the test, as well as the timing of each response. Next, the answers are analyzed and points are calculated. Then, through mathematical calculations, a result is derived from the test data, which is interpreted by a specialist. If an inkblot does not evoke any associations in a person or he cannot describe what he sees on it, this may mean that the object depicted on the card is blocked in his consciousness, or that the image on it is associated in his subconscious with a topic that he would not like to discuss at the moment.

CARD 1

ON THE FIRST CARD WE SEE A SPOT OF BLACK INK. It is shown first, and the answer to it allows the psychologist to assume how this person performs tasks that are new to him - therefore, associated with a certain stress. People usually say that the image reminds them of a bat, a moth, a butterfly, or the face of some animal, such as an elephant or a rabbit. The answer reflects the respondent's personality type as a whole.

For some people, the image of a bat is associated with something unpleasant and even demonic; for others it is a symbol of rebirth and the ability to navigate in the dark. Butterflies can symbolize transition and transformation, as well as the ability to grow, change, and overcome difficulties. The moth symbolizes feelings of abandonment and ugliness, as well as weakness and anxiety. The face of an animal, particularly an elephant, often symbolizes the ways in which we confront difficulties and the fear of internal problems. It can also mean “a bull in a china shop,” that is, it conveys a feeling of discomfort and indicates a certain problem that a person is currently trying to get rid of.

CARD 2

THIS CARD SHOWS A RED AND BLACK SPOT, and people often see it as something sexy. Parts of the red color are usually interpreted as blood, and the reaction to it reflects how a person manages his feelings and anger and how he deals with physical harm. Respondents most often say that the spot reminds them of an act of supplication, two people, a person looking into a mirror, or a long-legged animal such as a dog, bear or elephant.

If a person sees two people in the spot, it can symbolize codependency, an obsession with sex, ambivalence about sexual intercourse, or a focus on connection and close relationships with others. If the spot resembles a person reflected in a mirror, this may symbolize self-centeredness or, on the contrary, a tendency to self-criticism. Each of the two options expresses either a negative or positive personality characteristic, depending on how the image evokes in the person. If the respondent sees a dog in the spot, this may mean that he is loyal and loving friend. If he perceives the stain as something negative, then he needs to face his fears and acknowledge his inner feelings. If the spot reminds a person of an elephant, this may symbolize a tendency to think, developed intelligence and good memory; however, sometimes such a vision indicates a negative perception of one’s own body. The bear imprinted in the spot symbolizes aggression, competition, independence, and disobedience. In the case of English-speaking patients, a play on words can play a role: bear (bear) and bare (naked), which means a feeling of insecurity, vulnerability, as well as the sincerity and honesty of the respondent. The spot on this card is reminiscent of something sexual, and if the respondent sees it as a person praying, this may indicate an attitude towards sex in the context of religion. If the respondent sees blood in the stain, it means that he associates physical pain with religion or, when experiencing complex emotions like anger, resorts to prayer, or associates anger with religion.

CARD 3

THE THIRD CARD SHOWS A SPOT OF RED AND BLACK INK, and its perception symbolizes the patient's attitude towards other people in social interaction. Most often, respondents see on it the image of two people, a person looking in the mirror, a butterfly or a moth.

If a person sees two people having lunch in a spot, this means that he leads an active social life. A spot that resembles two washing hands, speaks of insecurity, a feeling of one’s own uncleanliness, or paranoid fear. If a respondent sees two people playing a game in a spot, this often indicates that he is taking the position of an opponent in social interactions. If the spot resembles a person looking at his reflection in the mirror, this may indicate self-centeredness, inattention to others and an inability to understand people.

CARD 4

SPECIALISTS CALL THE FOURTH CARD “FATHER'S.” The spot on it is black, and some parts of it are fuzzy and blurry. Many people see something large and frightening in this picture - an image that is usually perceived not as feminine, but as masculine. The reaction to this spot allows us to reveal a person’s attitude towards authorities and the characteristics of his upbringing. Most often, the spot reminds respondents of a huge animal or monster, or a hole of some animal or its skin.

If the patient sees a large animal or monster in the spot, this may symbolize feelings of inferiority and admiration for authority, as well as an exaggerated fear of people in authority, including one's own father. If the stain resembles the skin of an animal to the respondent, this often symbolizes severe internal discomfort when discussing topics related to the father. However, this may also indicate that the problem of one’s own inferiority or admiration for authority is not relevant for this respondent.

CARD 5

ON THIS CARD WE SEE THE BLACK SPOT AGAIN. The association caused by it, like the image on the first card, reflects our true “I”. Looking at this image, people usually do not feel threatened, and since the previous cards evoked completely different emotions in them, this time the person does not experience any particular tension or discomfort - therefore, a deeply personal reaction will be characteristic. If the image he sees is very different from the answer given when he saw the first card, this means that cards two through four most likely made a big impression on him. Most often, this image reminds people of a bat, butterfly or moth.

CARD 6

THE PICTURE ON THIS CARD IS ALSO SINGLE COLOR, BLACK; it is distinguished by the texture of the stain. This image evokes interpersonal intimacy, which is why it is called the “sex card.” Most often, people say that the spot reminds them of a hole or the skin of an animal, which may indicate a reluctance to enter into close relationships with other people and, as a result, a feeling of inner emptiness and isolation from society.

CARD 7

THE SPOT ON THIS CARD IS ALSO BLACK and is usually associated with the feminine principle. Since people most often see images of women and children in this spot, it is called “maternal.” If a person has difficulty describing what is shown on the card, this may indicate that he has difficult relationships with women in his life. Respondents often say that the spot reminds them of the heads or faces of women or children; it can also bring back memories of a kiss.

If the spot appears similar to the heads of women, this symbolizes the feelings associated with the respondent's mother, which affect his attitude towards the female sex in general. If the spot resembles children's heads, this symbolizes feelings associated with childhood and the need to care for the child who lives in the soul of the respondent, or that the patient's relationship with his mother needs close attention and, possibly, correction. If a person sees two heads bowed for a kiss in the spot, this indicates his desire to be loved and reunite with his mother, or that he seeks to reproduce the once close relationship with his mother in other relationships, including romantic or social ones.

CARD 8

THIS CARD HAS GRAY, PINK, ORANGE, AND BLUE. Not only is this the first multi-color card in the test, it is also particularly difficult to interpret. If it is precisely when demonstrating it or changing the pace of showing pictures that the respondent experiences obvious discomfort, it is very likely that in life he has difficulties with processing difficult situations or emotional stimuli. Most often people say that they see a four-legged animal, a butterfly or a moth here.

CARD 9

THE SPOT ON THIS CARD INCLUDES GREEN, PINK AND ORANGE COLORS. It is vague in outline, so most people have a hard time understanding what the image reminds them of. For this reason, this card assesses how well a person copes with lack of structure and uncertainty. Most often, patients see on it either the general outlines of a person, or some vague form of evil.

If the responder sees a person, then the feelings experienced convey how successfully he copes with the disorganization of time and information. If the spot resembles some abstract image of evil, this may indicate that the person needs a clear routine in his life to feel comfortable, and that he does not cope well with uncertainty.

CARD 10

THE LAST CARD OF THE RORSCHACH TEST HAS THE MOST COLORS: there are orange, yellow, green, pink, gray, and blue. In form it is somewhat similar to the eighth card, but in complexity it is more consistent with the ninth. Many people have a rather pleasant feeling when they see this card, except those who were very puzzled by the difficulty of identifying the image depicted on the previous card; when they look at this picture they feel the same. This may indicate that they have difficulty coping with similar, synchronous, or overlapping stimuli. Most often people see a crab, lobster, spider, rabbit head, snakes or caterpillars on this card.

The image of a crab symbolizes the respondent's tendency to become too attached to things and people, or a quality such as tolerance. If a person sees a lobster in a picture, it can indicate his strength, tolerance and ability to cope with minor problems, as well as his fear of harming himself or being harmed by someone else. If the spot resembles a spider, it may be a symbol of fear, a feeling that the person has been dragged into something by force or deceit. difficult situation. In addition, the image of a spider symbolizes an overly protective and caring mother and the power of a woman. If a person sees the head of a rabbit, it can symbolize reproductive ability and a positive attitude towards life. Snakes reflect a sense of danger or a sense of being deceived, as well as fear of the unknown. Snakes are also often regarded as a phallic symbol and are associated with unacceptable or forbidden sexual desires. Since this is the last card in the test, if the patient sees caterpillars on it, this indicates prospects for his growth and understanding that people are constantly changing and developing.