No abstract

No abstract

The Rorschach inkblots are one of the most widely used sets of test stimuli in the history of psychology, and a substantial body of evidence supports the construct validity of a number of variables, particularly from the Comprehensive and Performance Assessment systems (Mihura et al., 2013; for review see Meyer et al., 2016). As Aschieri and Pascarella (this issue) point out, the instrument has significant potential for the examination of treatment change, and is often used for this purpose (Aschieri & Pascarella, 2021). In particular, as a performance-based test, Rorschach scores are relatively independent of biases associated with questionnaires, which likely explains the relatively strong performance of the Rorschach for predicting behavioral outcomes in previous research (Hiller et al., 1999). In this sense, the Rorschach has the potential to communicate whether or not a patient has actually improved, somewhat independent of their desire to communicate that they have improved, as a function of treatment. Initial evidence by Grønnerød ( 2004) supported the use of some Rorschach variables for this purpose, and the results of the follow-up study by Aschieri and Pascarella generally support those conclusions. However, a more general conclusion is that a lot more research, and a lot more rigorous research, is needed to determine whether and how to use the Rorschach to evaluate treatment change. Aschieri and Pascarella raised this issue in the discussion, and noted that many of the studies they reviewed had mixed evidence for overall design quality. In this commentary, we build upon their recommendations by offering several specific