Jump to content

Talk:Rorschach test

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 87.224.68.42 (talk) at 09:37, 22 June 2015 (→Popular knowledge: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

New Rorschach online test with pretty accurate results

I think it will be useful to add link to this online test made by russian psyhologist student http://rorschach-inkblot-test.com/. It has most accurate results from all online tests i've passed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rorshach 777 (talk • contribs) 15:52, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Rorshach 777: How about the copyright? As far as I know, Rorschach is not free to copy? Another question is quality and validation? I assume that you are this student ? :-) Why do you think, that it is more than a game? --Brainswiffer (talk) 15:05, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes the guy who drew the 10 inkblots is more than 70/90 years dead per Hermann_Rorschach. Therefore these images are public domain which is how we are able to have them here. Now a company in Switzerland does claim to own them and they send out legal threats such as they did to us but this is just intimidation and they know they do not have the law on their side. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:15, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I see. Copyright of the pictures may not be the biggest problem. But if this "test" namedrops Rorschach and - as I assume - there is no sufficiant validation of the very absolute interpretations, this is a problem of quality. Its not a test, but a psychological game. Or the test is also "*stolen" from some newer "standardized" developments, I remember regarding Rorschach test? Theen the copyright question comes again. --Brainswiffer (talk) 06:34, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I am not saying we should link to this site. The next question is are ideas copyrightable? And the answer is no. As long as the person who created this website paraphrased rather than copied and pasted from sources they are okay.
Now on to the question of does this test "work". That is a completely different matter entirely and one I am not going to get into. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:38, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
OK, most I agree. But published ideas must be protected by copyright, otherwise its not possible to "survive" for thinking and writing persons. And as far as I know, a standardised Rorschach exists. I do not know, to which extent this person copypasted this. When you see also a quality problem (psychological tests have fo fulfill some criteria, f.e. reliability and validity), this is a good reason not to add this link here. --Brainswiffer (talk) 05:50, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If you publish something you own that arrangement of words. You do not own the ideas. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:51, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
First: any copyright can't exist for 100 years, so it is free and many psyhologist all over the world are using it right now. All results in this test are not "stolen" from any "standardized" developments, just copy some part of any result and search it in Google - you will see that results are unique.Second: quality and validation - nobody says that online test could replace real testing, but online test could be usefull for great part of users who want to take it online. Here you can see russian version of this online test - http://lml.com.ua/test-rorshaha/

How do you think if results quality and validation have low level could this page get 18000 facebook shares and 150000 users just for two months? You can also read comments what real people are thinking about their results Rorshach 777 (talk • contribs) 11:56, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is no consensus to link to your website. Sorry. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 09:04, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
+1, Facebook shares and users you also have in games or esoteric stuff. Its not a sign for quality of a psychological test (and Rorschach is one of this). "Rorschach Game" without any claim of validity describes it more. --Brainswiffer (talk) 08:01, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This is an odd objection. If we rejected tests because of doubts about quality and validity, then this whole Rorschach article would be deleted. Even when given by psychologists, it is just an amusing unscientific game. So I suggest inserting the link. The reader can decide for himself how worthwhile it is. Roger (talk) 14:57, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Not quite correct. Rorschach and his test was state of the art at his time (!), and we also reflect critics from the view of today. But we have 2015 now :-)I know from BPS discussions, that the use of the word psychological test in UK also is connected to (minimal) quality requirements. The interpretation "report" of this "game" is not validated and in formulations too much absolutely. When you find this on an psychological article, the misunderstanding can be: this is state of the art of all psychological tests. --Brainswiffer (talk) 16:06, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
1. Brainswiffer, you say that you "know from BPS discussions, that the use of the word psychological test in UK also is connected to (minimal) quality requirements." Would you like to explain exactly what you mean by that?
2. Very lengthy discussions here some years ago concluded that the inkblot images themselves are no longer protected by any copyright anywhere in the world. But I'm not sure that's true of the technique for interpreting and scoring, is it? It's unclear how close the "Russian online Facebook version" is to the materials owned by Hogrefe Publishing Ltd, which has a registered trade mark for the test: [1]. If it's identical (or close enough), I suspect there would be some infringement of Hogrefe's copyright.
3. We currently link to "an interactive version of the Harrower-Erickson Multiple Choice Rorschach Test": [2]. Why is that? Martinevans123 (talk) 17:08, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My opinion is that the site is not appropriate for the article. The article says "subjects' perceptions of inkblots are recorded and then analyzed using psychological interpretation, complex algorithms, or both", I don't think we have any reason to believe that this online test is consistent with that. Chillum 16:11, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Martinevans123: I know from discussions of EFPA (Board of Assessment), ITC and the ISO 10667 some colleagues of BPS (f.e. Dave Bartram). I know, that there are some important initatives (best seen here: http://www.intestcom.org/page/5) with "British lead" and I was very impressed about the effords of BPS (I am familiar with German and Swiss situation). There is also a good co-operation with U.S (see ITC) I cannot imagine, that this standards are without influence for public description of any psychological tests here (and a link here is something like a public recommendation). I also know, that UK has one of most elaborated systems of applicant qualification and test evaluation. We reflect this very carefully also in German WP. I came only to your WP, because this link also was "spammed" there - and deleted. This special test has not any validation as far as I see. In do not know the other mentioned above (and I am a fan of online testing).--Brainswiffer (talk) 18:17, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks. You from de.wiki? Martinevans123 (talk) 19:27, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I am. BTW: User:Rorshach 777 seems to be an expert of some critical thing and my Ghost counts 6 different trackers on his page. Seems the reason for his wish and also an argument against? --Brainswiffer (talk) 06:12, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
What! You've got a ghost? Martinevans123 (talk) 10:12, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, my good ghost prevents spying :-)--Brainswiffer (talk) 16:30, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, you need to tell Jimbo. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:37, 24 May 2015 (UTC) [reply]
Sure he knows :-) BTW2: The mentionned Rorschach test page was offline, but is back. I wonder why there is no imprint or name on this page, f.e. in Germany a NoGo.--Brainswiffer (talk) 16:57, 24 May 2015 (UTC) [reply]

PLEASE REMOVE THE INKBLOTS

The section (the pictures and statistics) on the real inkblots is unnecessary and should not be provided to the public. By doing so, you are jeopardizing the validity of this instrument. The R-PAS (and any former versions) are to be used by trained professionals only, and by giving this information, you're running the risk of invalidating this measure. Please consider removing. I am also fairly certain it is a direct violation of the instrument's copyrights, as they are not to be published or replicated without direct approval (per usual). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 45.48.51.94 (talk) 21:54, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Given Wikipedia's fondness for popular culture I'm surprised that this article doesn't touch on the popularity of the Rorschach test in portrayals of psychiatry. The inkblot test is surely the second most popular image of psychiatry next to someone telling you to lie down on a couch and talk about your mother. I'm sure I've seen at least one comedy where a character is given the Rorschach test and gives humorously over-the-top responses. (Probably The Simpsons.)

And surely the fact that anyone in the Western world who's given this test will have already seen it on TV, and will have certain preconceptions, affects its validity. --87.224.68.42 (talk) 09:37, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Rorschach_test&oldid=668090770"