X T HAS BEEN a number of years since the senior author published a series of essentially negative results with respect to the influence of color on the Rorschach Test (5) The general conclusions from this expenment, in which a series of standard inkblots were compared with a noncolored version, were that the presence of color did not influence the psychogram (other than the actual color responses themselves) and that color was also unrelated to the presence of signs of "color shock " Since publication of that article, a number of other experiments dealing with the influence of color have appeared, most of which have confirmed the original findings (1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7) Results which are at vanance with the study by Lazarus (5) have been reported by Supola et al (8,9) In one article by Siipola, Kuhns, and Taylor (9) a number of criticisms were offered of the Lazarus methodology and conclusions The purpose of the present article is to clarify some of the issues raised by Siipola's data and criticisms, to present reanalyzed data from the onginal study, and to discuss an additional expenmentIn bnef, Supola found that the presence of color resulted m increased response time, particularly when the color was incompatible with the association suggested by the form of the blot, that cdor increased the frequency of positive and negative affective attitudes as compared with neutral; that color resulted in changes m content reflecting associative disruption; and that these effects were restricted largely to blots which were not "highly structured " In addition, Supola et al (9) produced data which suggested that the procedures 'The present data were collected while the senior author was at the Johns Hc^kms Umversity RORSGHACM RESPONSES AND C»LOR 357 of retesting subjects with the same blots produced a memory effect which obscured the effects of color.In dealing with the discrepancies between their results and those of Lazarus, Siipola et al offered two cnticisms of the methodology used by Lazarus In the first place, it was argued that the test-retest design and the counterbalancing procedures used by Lazarus produced a confounding memory effect when the sequence of presentation was from chromatic to achromatic sets of blots Therefore the effect of color might have been obscured for at least half the subjects Second, some of the analyses reported by Lazarus compared the data from all 10 cards in the chromatic and achromatic senes This resulted in adding to the essential color-noncolor cwnparisons the unessential data from the five cards on which there never was any color in the first place Thus any differences between achromatic and chromatic senes would be hiddenWe shall deal with these two criticisms by citing some additional information and by a reanalysis of the ongmal data of Lazarus (5). In the first place, the results of a study by Baughman (3) are in close agreement with those of Lazarus in spite of the fact that Baughman's procedure did not use the counterbalancing technique Baughman used an individual administration of...