What Is the TAT? A Review of Ten Years of Research

Keiser, Ross; Prather, Ellen

doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa5503&4_36

Cited by 13 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Specifically, with some important exceptions that we will discuss, most of these techniques as commonly used by practitioners do not include (a) standardized stimuli and testing instructions, (b) systematic algorithms for scoring responses to these stimuli, and (c) well calibrated norms for comparing responses with those of other individuals (see also Hunsley, Lee, & Wood, in press). As we will see, the absence of these features, particularly (a) and (b), renders the literature on certain projective techniques difficult to interpret, because some investigators have used markedly different stimuli, scoring methods, or both, across studies (e.g., see Keiser & Prather, 1990).…”

Section: A Primer Of Projective Techniques and Their Rationalementioning

confidence: 99%

“…More pertinent to the present review is the fact that there is little consistency regarding which TAT cards are used in published research. In a review of 69 published studies of the TAT over a 10 year period, Keiser and Prather (1990) found enormous variability across investigations in the cards used and even in whether these cards were in the original TAT set. They concluded that the extent to which TAT findings can be generalized across investigations is unknown.…”

Section: Thematic Apperception Testmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Scientific Status of Projective Techniques

Lilienfeld

Wood

Garb

2000

Psychol Sci Public Interest

607

391

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-AlthoughControversy has been no stranger to the field of personality assessment, and no issue in this field has been more controversial than the scientific status of projective techniques. Indeed, the novice reader attempting to make sense of the sprawling and bewilderingly complex literature on projective techniques is immediately confronted with a striking paradox. On the one hand, during the past four decades a litany of personality assessment researchers (e.g., Anastasi, 1982;Gittelman Klein, 1986;Dawes, 1994) have come forth to decry the reliability and validity of most projective techniques (see Lilienfeld, 1999). Jensen's (1965) famous quotation, although 35 years old, still captures the sentiments of many contemporary scientists toward the Rorschach Inkblot Test and numerous other projective techniques: ". . . the rate of scientific progress in clinical psychology might well be measured by the speed and thoroughness with which it gets over the Rorschach" (p. 238). On the other hand, clinicians in the United States and to a lesser extent those abroad continue to use projective techniques with great regularity, and many contend that these techniques are virtually indispensable to their daily practice (Watkins, Campbell, Neiberding, & Hallmark, 1995). The crux of this paradox was incisively summed up by Anastasi (1982), who observed that "Projective techniques present a curious discrepancy between research and practice. When evaluated as psychometric instruments, the large majority make a poor showing. Yet their popularity in clinical use continues unabated" (p. 564).Indeed, despite the sustained and often withering criticisms directed at projective techniques during the past several decades (Dawes, 1994;Lowenstein, 1987), numerous surveys demonstrate that such techniques continue to enjoy widespread popularity among clinicians. Durand, Blanchard, and Mindell (1988) reported that 49% of the directors of clinical psychology graduate programs and 65% of the directors of clinical psychology internships believed that formal training in projective techniques is important. Watkins et al. (1995) found that 5 projective techniques, including the Rorschach and Thematic Apperception Test (TAT), were among the 10 instruments most frequently used by clinical psychologists. For example, 82% of clinical psychologists reported that they administered the Rorschach at least "occasionally" in their test batteries and 43% reported that they "frequently" or "always" administered it. There is some indication, however, that the popularity of certain projective techniques may be waning. In a recent survey of practicing clinicians, Piotrowski, Belter, and Keller (1998) reported that several projective techniques, including the Rorschach and TAT, have been abandoned by a sizeable minority of users. Some authors (e.g., Piotrowski et al., 1998; Piotrowski & Belter, 1989) have attributed the recent decline in the popularity of projective techniques to the advent of managed care, although at least some of this decline may al...

show abstract

Section: A Primer Of Projective Techniques and Their Rationalementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Thematic Apperception Testmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Scientific Status of Projective Techniques

Lilienfeld

Wood

Garb

2000

Psychol Sci Public Interest

607

391

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A total of 31 TAT pictures are available, but previous studies have usually used only five or six of them (Keiser & Prather, 1990). Based on Keiser and Prather’s (1990) review, the five most frequently used cards (1, 4, 6BM, 7BM, and 8GF) were chosen and administered. Picture 1 is of a boy who sits in front of a violin; in Picture 4, a woman is clutching a man who seems to pull away from her; Picture 6BM is of an elderly woman who stands by a window with her back to a young man; in Picture 7BM, an elderly man is watching a young man; Picture 8GF is of a young woman sitting in a chair with her chin in her hand and looking into the distance (Murray, 1943).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Update of Murrayan Needs

Mellor

et al. 2013

Journal of Humanistic Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Much research work on motives has been based on the taxonomy of psychogenic needs originally proposed by Murray and his colleagues in 1938. However, many of these needs have received little attention, and some of them may be less relevant now than they were 70 years ago. Two studies were conducted to investigate current motives. In Study 1, we used the Striving Assessment to elicit the personal strivings of 255 undergraduate university students. Murray’s taxonomy was unable to account for 50% of the 2,937 strivings. These strivings were thematically groups into 11 new categories and combined with 7 Murrayan needs to form the Comprehensive Motivation Coding System (CMCS). In Study 2, Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) stories produced by 143 undergraduate student participants were coded by these two systems. Murray’s system was unable to fully account for 42% of motives identified in the TAT stories, but the CMCS was able to account for 89%. These findings suggest that Murrayan needs may not adequately describe contemporary motivations and that the CMCS has the potential to do so. However, due to the limited demographics of our sample, further investigations are needed.

show abstract

“…There have been conflicting findings about using free response techniques for research. Some have questioned the TAT's efficacy (Keiser & Prather, 1990;Lilienfeld, Wood, & Garb, 2000), but the scientific community has generally embraced it (Alvarado, 1994;Jenkins, 2008;Regan & Liaschenko, 2008;Schultheiss & Brunstein, 2001); indeed, Lilienfeld et al (2000) had a more positive view of the TAT than of other free response measures. It is also possible that the pictures in Cards 3BM and 10 elicited death and grief themes, from bereaved and non-bereaved alike, due to their distinct content.…”

Section: Figurementioning

confidence: 99%

The Stories Students Tell: TAT Stories of Bereaved and Non-Bereaved College Students in a Christian Evangelical University

Walker

Balk

2013

Journal of Psychology and Theology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The researchers analyzed, within an Evangelical Christian university context, bereaved and non-bereaved college students' Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) stories for themes of death, grief, general coping, and religious coping. The study measured: (a) how students in the throes of their grief construct TAT stories, (b) differences in coping between bereaved vs. non-bereaved and women vs. men, and (c) coping for those who specifically mentioned death or grief themes. Results found that students constructed their TAT stories with high frequencies of general coping. Frequencies did not differ by bereavement status or gender, but those mentioning death or grief even more often mentioned coping. Religious coping themes emerged infrequently. Results differ greatly from a prior study at a secular university, suggesting the need to further examine this group. Findings are discussed in light of socio-historical context and recent studies measuring college student religiosity/spirituality. Implications for further research are made.

show abstract

What Is the TAT? A Review of Ten Years of Research

Cited by 13 publications

References 4 publications

The Scientific Status of Projective Techniques

The Scientific Status of Projective Techniques

An Update of Murrayan Needs

The Stories Students Tell: TAT Stories of Bereaved and Non-Bereaved College Students in a Christian Evangelical University

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About