The Validity of the Holtzman Inkblot Technique: New Indices

Objective: The present study examines the validity of 11 new Holtzman Inkblot Technique indices. These were chosen from Exner’s Comprehensive System (RCS) indices using two criteria: first, they had to be valid according to meta-analysis, and second, they must be computed using the HIT standard scoring system.Methods: Both techniques were administrated with a retest interval from 1 to 7days to a sample of 139 subjects (63 males and 76 females) from the general population. The validity of the new indices was studied through Pearson correlation (r) with the corresponding RCS indices.Results: Nine of the 11 new indices (R-HIT, F%-HIT, M-HIT, m-HIT, C'-HIT, Blends-HIT, PureH-HIT, DQ+HIT, and X-%-HIT) showed significant correlations with Rorschach scales, confirming our hypotheses. The correlation ranged from a minimum of 0.144 to a maximum of 0.414.Conclusions: The results provide support for the validity of the new HIT indices and have important implications for both clinical and research fields.

Tolerance of Ambiguity: Text Analytic vs Self-Report Measures in Two Nonclinical Groups

Avoidance of ambiguity can be examined by both text analytic and self-report methods. In previous studies using text analytic methods, clinical groups showed a higher avoidance of ambiguity than nonclinical subjects. In nonclinical subjects, however, higher avoidance of ambiguity did not correlate with emotional processes. In these studies, higher avoidance of ambiguity was assessed by a text analytic method (DoTA), which was applied to the Holtzman Inkblot Technique. However, the Inkblot Technique may not activate those cognitive-affective structures in nonclinical subjects required to elicit higher avoidance of ambiguity. Thus, the following discrepant results can be predicted: in nonclinical subjects, DoTA indicators of higher avoidance of ambiguity based on Holtzman Inkblot Technique do not show correlations with self-report measures of higher avoidance of ambiguity such as the Ambiguity Tolerance Questionnaire, the Inventory for the Measurement of Tolerance of Ambiguity (Reis inventory), or self-report measures of related traits of personality such as the Giessen Test. Self-report measures of higher avoidance of ambiguity should show such correlations. Two studies were carried out to test these hypotheses. In Study 1, 80 nonclinical subjects (48 women, M age = 34.5 yr.) were examined using the DoTA text analytic method, the Ambiguity Tolerance Questionnaire-14 and the Giessen Test. In Study 2, 82 nonclinical subjects (43 women, M age = 34.0 yr.) were tested using the Reis inventory. The results obtained in these subjects are consistent with the hypothesis.

The Influence of Color on Emotions in the Holtzman Inkblot Technique

In this study, the influence of chromatic and achromatic color on emotions in the Holtzman Inkblot Technique (HIT) was tested empirically. Samples of normals (n = 30), patients with neurotic disorders (n = 30), borderline patients (n = 30), and both acute (n = 25) and chronic schizophrenics (n = 25) were studied with the HIT. A computerized investigation of verbally expressed emotions was performed by means of the “Affective Dictionary Ulm” (ADU; Dahl, Hölzer, & Berry, 1992 ), which was applied to the responses in the HIT. The effect of color was tested separately for cards containing red vs. non-red colors. According to the results, normals, patients with neurotic disorders, and borderline patients expressed love and anger significantly more often in response to cards containing red colors. For the non-red color cards neither an effect on love and anger, nor on anxiety and depression could be demonstrated. Furthermore, the chromatic cards of the HIT elicited significantly more different words given in response to a card than the achromatic cards. Again, this was true for normals, patients with neurotic disorders, and borderline patients, but not for schizophrenics. Structural ambiguity of the HIT cards correlated significantly negatively with the number of emotion words given in response to a card, again with the exception of schizophrenics. The latter result is discussed referring to the “almost axiomatic rule” ( Gunderson & Singer, 1975, p. 6 ) that borderline patients function adequately on structured tests but appear more seriously disturbed on less structured tests.

The Role of Structure in the Assessment of Psychopathology

Summary: This study investigated the role that the structure of a diagnostic instrument plays in the assessment of personality functioning. Empirical studies have shown that the cards of the Rorschach and Holtzman Inkblot Technique (HIT) vary significantly with regard to their structure. Thus, it was possible to investigate if cards of high vs. low structure tend to elicit specific diagnostically useful responses. For this purpose, samples of normals (n = 30), patients with neurotic disorders (n = 30), borderline patients (n = 30), acute schizophrenics (n = 25), and chronic schizophrenics (n = 25) were studied with the HIT. For each diagnostic group it was examined if cards of high vs. low structure tended to elicit more thought disordered responses, hostility, and anxiety according to the HIT scoring system. With regard to structure, two aspects were differentiated, structural vs. interpretative ambiguity of the HIT cards. In all nonschizophrenic groups, cards of high structural ambiguity elicited significantly less thought disordered responses. By contrast, cards of high interpretative ambiguity elicited more thought disordered responses, anxiety, and hostility in all groups except the chronic schizophrenics. The measures of structural vs. interpretative ambiguity of the HIT cards showed a negative correlation in all diagnostic groups. According to these results, both aspects of ambiguity and their interplay play an important role in the assessment of psychopathology, at least within the range of ambiguity represented by the inkblots of the HIT.