Development of the Apperceptive Personality Test

Comparison of TAT and Free Speech Techniques for Eliciting Source Material in Computerized Content Analysis

“…This may be true in most instances, although the sensitivity of TAT samples to a speaker's age and gender may cause the TAT to be less desirable when such variables are extraneous or potentially Downloaded by [Central Michigan University] at 08:34 04 November 2014 Ritzler, 1985) or the Apperceptive Personality Test (Holmstrom, Silber, & Karp, 1990) may be preferable to the TAT for eliciting verbal material to content analyze. For example, the Picture Projective Test, which is based on photos from the Family of Man (Steichen, 1955) collection, yields content that is more affectively balanced and has higher discriminant validity than the content produced by Murray's original cards.…”

“…Absence of diagnostic discrimination in some TAT studies of motivation relates to conditions of test administration (Lundy, 1988). However, a more serious problem appears to relate to the application of scoring systems (see Holmstrom et al, 1990), including Murray's (1943) original system. As Groth-Marnat (1984, p. 198) observed, "Although Murray's approach involves a certain degree of quantification, it is basically a qualitative method."…”

Prediction of depression with the apperceptive personality test

“…The APT (Holmstrom et al, 1990;Karp et al, 1989) provided measures of 18 independent personality variables. (Five of the standard 23 APT variables are composite variables and were not included in this analysis).…”

Convergence between Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) and self‐report: Another look at some old questions

“…As explored using a multiple‐choice adaptation of the Rorschach (Morey & McCredie, ), another possible explanation for the inconsistent convergence between the TAT and self‐report is the method variance associated with the different response format of these measures, with the fixed nature of self‐report response options contrasting with the open‐ended nature of TAT narrative responses. As in the case of the Amplified Multiple Choice Test (Harrower & Steiner, ), there has also been a history of efforts to develop structured scoring protocols to accompany the TAT and related measures (Holmstrom, Silber, & Karp, ; Hurley, ; Johnston, ; Schultheiss, Yankova, Dirlikov, & Schad, ), and the use of these adapted approaches may serve to control some of the method variance precluding heteromethod convergence. For instance, Holmstrom et al () developed the Apperceptive Personality Test (APT), in which participants are presented with a series of eight emotionally ambiguous pictures and a set of structured open‐ended questions pertaining to each picture.…”

“…As in the case of the Amplified Multiple Choice Test (Harrower & Steiner, 1951), there has also been a history of efforts to develop structured scoring protocols to accompany the TAT and related measures (Holmstrom, Silber, & Karp, 1990;Hurley, 1955;Johnston, 1957;Schultheiss, Yankova, Dirlikov, & Schad, 2009), and the use of these adapted approaches may serve to control some of the method variance precluding heteromethod convergence. For instance, Holmstrom et al (1990) developed the Apperceptive Personality Test (APT), in which participants are presented with a series of eight emotionally ambiguous pictures and a set of structured open-ended questions pertaining to each picture. The APT was found to demonstrate small but significant relationships with the majority of hypothesized constructs on the MMPI (Karp, Silber, Holmstrom, & Kellert, 1992), suggesting that imposing greater structure on the response format may increase convergence with highly structured measures such as self-report.…”