You are not currently logged in.
Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:
If You Use a Screen ReaderThis 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
Vol. 9, No. 5 (Sep., 1998), pp. 402-404
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40063327
Page Count: 3
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.
Preview not available
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.
Psychological Science © 1998 Association for Psychological Science