Access

You are not currently logged in.

Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:

login

Log in to your personal account or through your institution.

If You Use a Screen Reader

This content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.

The Validity of the Rorschach and the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory: Results from Meta-Analyses

Howard N. Garb, Colleen M. Florio and William M. Grove
Psychological Science
Vol. 9, No. 5 (Sep., 1998), pp. 402-404
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40063327
Page Count: 3
  • Read Online (Free)
  • Subscribe ($19.50)
  • Cite this Item
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
The Validity of the Rorschach and the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory: Results from Meta-Analyses
Preview not available

Abstract

Results from meta-analyses have been widely cited to defend the validity of the Rorschach. However, the meta-analyses have been flawed. For example, one meta-analysis included results that were obtained by calculating correlations but not results that were obtained by conducting t tests or analyses of variance. When we reanalyzed the data from the most widely cited meta-analysis (Parker, Hanson, & Hunsley, 1988), we found that for confirmatory studies (also called convergent-validity studies), the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) explained 23% to 30% of the variance, whereas the Rorschach explained only 8% to 13% of the variance. These results indicate that the Rorschach is not as valid as the MMPI.

Page Thumbnails

  • Thumbnail: Page 
402
    402
  • Thumbnail: Page 
403
    403
  • Thumbnail: Page 
404
    404