Advertisement

Other Projective Techniques

  • Leonard P. Campos
Chapter

Abstract

A modern introduction to projective techniques does not merely concentrate its attention on the “tried and true” method. Techniques must be included which reflect outstanding promise for the future and which serve as new and creative variations of the Old.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

Introduction

  1. Bolgar, Hedda, & Fischer, Liselotte K. Personality projection in the world test. Amer. J.Orthopsychiat., 1947, 17, 117–128.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Buhler, Charlotte, Lumry, Gayle, K., & Carrol, Helen, S. World test standardization studies. J. Child Psychiat., 1951, 2, 1–81.Google Scholar
  3. Levy, L. H. Psychological Interpretation. N.Y.: Holt, Rinehard, & Winston, 1963.Google Scholar
  4. Lowenfeld, Margaret. The world technique. Top. Probl. Psychother., 1960, 3, 248–263.Google Scholar

The Human Face: The Szondi Test

  1. Aumack, L. The Szondi: internal or external validation? Percept, mot. Skills, 1957, 7, 7–15.Google Scholar
  2. Barraclough, Patricia, Cole, D., & Reeb, Mildred. The influence of test instructions on Szondi results. J. din. Psychol., 1952, 8, 165–167.Google Scholar
  3. Bell, C. Essays on the Anatomy of Expression in Painting. London: Longmans, Green, 1806.Google Scholar
  4. Borstelman, L. J., & Klopfer, W. G. The Szondi test: a review and critical evaluation. Psychol. Bull, 1953, 50, 112–132.Google Scholar
  5. Chambers, J. L., & Lieberman, L. Differences between normal and clinical groups in Judging, evaluating, and associating needs. J. clin. Psychol, 1965, 21, 145–149.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Cohen, J., & Feigenbaum, L. The assumption of additivity on the Szondi test. J. proj. Tech., 1954, 18, 11–16.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Coulter, W. M. The Szondi test and the prediction of antisocial behavior. J. proj. Tech., 1959, 23, 24–29.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Darwin, C. Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals. London: Murray Publishers, 1872.Google Scholar
  9. David, H. P. A Szondi test bibliography, 1939-1953. J.proj. Tech., 1954, 18, 17–32.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. David, H. P., Orne, M., & Rabinowitz, W. Qualitative and quantitative Szondi diagnosis. J. proj. Tech., 1953, 17, 75–78.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. David, H. P., & Rabinowitz, W. The development of a Szondi instability score. J. consult. Psychol, 1951, 15, 334–336.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. David, H. P., & Rabinowitz, W. Szondi patterns in epileptic and homosexual males. J. consult. Psychol, 1952, 16, 247–250.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Davis, N. E., & Raimy, V. Stimulus functions of the Szondi cards. J. clin. Psychol, 1952, 8, 155–160.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Deri, Susan. Introduction to the Szondi Test. New York: Grune and Stratton, 1949.Google Scholar
  15. Deri, Susan. The Szondi test. In Abt, L. E. & Bellak, L. Projective Psychology. New York: Knopf, 1950. Pp. 298–321.Google Scholar
  16. Deri, Susan. Differential diagnosis of delinquents with the Szondi test. J. proj. Tech., 1954 18, 33–41.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Drombose, L. A., & Slobin, M. S. The IES test. Percept, mot. Skills, 1958, 8, 347–389.Google Scholar
  18. Dudek, F., & Patterson, H. Relationship among the Szondi test items. J. consult. Psychol, 1952, 16, 389–394.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Eriksen, C. W. Needs in perception and projective techniques. J. proj. Tech., 1954, 18, 425–440.Google Scholar
  20. Fleishman, M. The discriminative power of Szondi’s quotient of tendency tension. J. proj. Tech., 1954, 18, 42–46.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Fleishman, M. The investigation of changes in directional reactions on the Szondi test. J. gen. Psychol, 1956, 54, 197–202.Google Scholar
  22. Fosberg, I. A. Four experiments with the Szondi test. J. consult. Psychol, 1951, 15, 39–44.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Glad, D. D., & Shearn, C. R. An emotional projection test. Percept, mot. Skills, 1956, 6, 1–12 (Monogr. suppl. no. 1).Google Scholar
  24. Gordon, L. V. A factor analysis of the 48 Szondi pictures. J. Psychol, 1953, 36, 387–392.Google Scholar
  25. Guerrier, R. La signification du facteur 021Cm021D de Szondi. Psyche Paris, 1954, 9, 255–258.Google Scholar
  26. Guertin, W. H. A consideration of factor loadings on the Szondi test. J. clin. Psychol, 1950a, 6, 262–266.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Guertin, W. H. A test of the basic assumption of the Szondi. J. consult. Psychol, 1950b, 14, 404–407.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Guertin, W. H. A comparison of the stimulus values of the Szondi pictures with those of normal Americans. J. clin. Psychol, 1951, 7, 163–166.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Hamilton, J. T. A study of incidental stimulus values in the Szondi test. J. clin. Psychol, 1959, 15, 322–324.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Harrower, Molly. Experimental studies with the Szondi test. Szondi Newsltr., 1949, 1, (suppl.).Google Scholar
  31. Harrower, Molly. The first offender: a study of Juvenile delinquents by the Szondi test. Szondi Newsltr., 1958, 6(3), 1–16.Google Scholar
  32. Hill, V. T. The Szondi test and chance. Szondi Newsltr., 1951, 3, 1–16.Google Scholar
  33. Horrocks, J. E. Assessment of Behavior. Columbus, Ohio: C. E. Merrill Books, 1964. Pp. 66–74.Google Scholar
  34. Horwitz, M. The veridicality of liking and disliking. In Taguiri, R. & Petrullo, L. (Eds.). Person Perception and Interpersonal Behavior. Stanford University Press, 1958. Pp. 191-209.Google Scholar
  35. Hurley, J. R. Psychodiagnostic limitations of Szondi interseries changes. J. clin. Psychol., 1957, 13, 396–399.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Laszlo, C. Die homosexualitat des mannes im Szondi test. Beitr. Sexual. Forsch., 1958, 8, 112.Google Scholar
  37. Lingoes, J. C. Minnesota multiphasic personality test correlates of Szondi picture preferences. Szondi Newsltr., 1957, 6, 1–12.Google Scholar
  38. Logan, J.C. Szondi profile changes from sorrow arousal. J. proj. Tech., 1961, 25, 184–192.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Lubin, A., & Malloy, M. An empirical test of some assumptions underlying the Szondi test. J. abnorm. soc. Psychol, 1951, 46, 480–484.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Moser, U. The determination of the relative strength of masculine-feminine drives by means of the Szondi procedure. J. proj. Tech., 1954, 75-88.Google Scholar
  41. Murray, H. A. The effect of fear upon estimates of the maliciousness of other personalities. J. soc. Psychol., 1933, 4, 310–329.Google Scholar
  42. Nolan, E. G. Szondi test protocols of monozygotic and dizygotic twin populations. J. proj. Tech., 1961, 25, 471–476.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Piderit, T. Mimik und Physiognomik, (4th ed.) Detmold & Meyers, 1925.Google Scholar
  44. Rabin, A. I. Szondi’s pictures: identification of diagnosis. J. abnorm. soc. Psychol. 1950, 45, 392–395.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Rabin, A. I. Genetic factors in the selection and rejection of Szondi’s pictures: a study of twins. Amer. J. Orthopsychiat. 1952, 22, 551–556.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Rainwater, L. A study of personality deficiencies between middle and lower class adolescents: the Szondi test in culture-personality research. Genet. Psychol. Monogr., 1956, 54, 3–86.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Ramfalk, C. W., & Rudhe, L. A contradicted hypothesis related to Szondi’s theory: the Szondi test used on alcoholics. Scand. J. Psychol, 1961, 2, 100–104.Google Scholar
  48. Richardson, H. The discriminability of the “drive factors” represented in the Szondi pictures. J. clin. Psychol, 1952, 8, 384–390.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Sappenfield, B. R. Test of a Szondi assumption by means of M-F photographs. J. Pers., 1965, 33, 409–417.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Schafer, R. Review of Deri, Susan, Introduction to the Szondi Test. J. abnorm. soc. Psychol, 1950, 45, 184–188.Google Scholar
  51. Scherer, I. W., Winne, J.F., Page, H. A., & Lipton, H. An analysis of patient-examiner interaction with the Szondi pictures. J. proj. Tech., 1952, 16, 225–237.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Scott, E. An investigation of Juvenile profiles on the Szondi test. J. clin. Psychol, 1955, 11, 46–50.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Shipman, W. G. Similarity of personality in the sociometric preference of mental patients. J. clin. Psychol, 1957, 13, 292–294.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Silverstein, A. B. “Diagnosing” Szondi’s pictures. J. proj. Tech., 1957, 21, 396–398.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Simpson, W. H., & Hill, V. T. The effects of verbal reward and punishment upon picture selection on the Szondi test. Szondi Newsltr., 1953, 4, 2–15.Google Scholar
  56. Steinberg, A. Szondi’s pictures: discrimination of diagnosis as a function of psychiatric experience and of internal consistency. J. proj. Tech., 1953, 17, 340–348.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. Szollosi, E., Lamphiear, D. E., & Best, H. L. The stimulus values of the Szondi pictures. J. consult. Psychol, 1951, 15, 419–424.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. Szondi, L. Contributions to fate analysis: analysis of marriage. Acta Psychol, 1937, 3, 1–80.Google Scholar
  59. Szondi, L. (Tr. by Aull, G.) Experimental Diagnostics of Drives. New York: Grune and Stratton, 1952, 18.Google Scholar
  60. Szondi, L. Triebpathologie, Vol. I. Elemente der exakten Triebpsychologie und Trieb- psychiatrie. Bern: Hans Huber, 1952.Google Scholar
  61. Szondi, L. Triebpathologie, Vol II. Ich analyse. Bern: Hans Huber, 1956.Google Scholar
  62. Szondi, L., Moser, U., & Webb, M. W. The Szondi Test in Diagnosis, Prognosis, and Treatment. Philadelphia, Penn.: Lippincott, 1959.Google Scholar
  63. Terstenjak, A. A critical study of the hypothesis of the affinity of instincts and sympathetic facial expression. Arch. Psicol. neur. Psich., 1956, 17, 1063–1092.Google Scholar
  64. VanKrevelen, Alice. Some effects of subject-examiner interaction on projective test performance. J. proj. Tech., 1954, 18, 107–109.Google Scholar
  65. Walder, H. Die h-Bedurfnisse und ihre krimogene Bedeutung. Beih. Schweiz. Z. Psychol Anwend., 1955, 26, 112–128.Google Scholar
  66. Warshaw, L., & Bailey, M. Person perception in relation to personality projection. J. proj. Tech., 1961, 25, 216–220.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. Whiteman, P. H. An experimental investigation of interseries changes as a diagnostic factor in the Szondi test. Amer. Psychol, 1951, 6, 342 (Abstract).Google Scholar
  68. Woodworth, R. S., & Schlosberg, H. Experimental Psychology. New York: Henry Holt, 1954. Pp. 111–120.Google Scholar

The Hand Test

  1. Bell, C. The Hand. Bridgewater Treatise, Vol. IV. London: William Pickering, 1834.Google Scholar
  2. Bricklin, B., Piotrowski, Z., & Wagner, E. The Hand Test: A New Projective Test with Special Reference to the Prediction of Overt Aggressive Behavior. Springfield, Ill.: Charles C Thomas, 1962.Google Scholar
  3. Carmichael, L., Roberts, S., & Wessell, N. A study of the judgment of manual expression as presented in still and motion pictures. J. soc. Psychol, 1937, 8, 115–142.Google Scholar
  4. Carus, C. G.Über Grund und Bedeutung der verschiedenen Formen der Hand. Ver- schied. Personen., Stuttgart, 1848.Google Scholar
  5. Hodge, J. R., & Wagner, E., The validity of hypnotically induced emotional states. Amer. J. Hyp., 1964, 7, 37–41.Google Scholar
  6. Huberman, J. A failure of the Wagner Hand Test to discriminate among workers rated high, average, low on activity level and general acceptability. J. pro J. Tech. Pers. Assess., 1964, 28, 280–283.Google Scholar
  7. Kretchmer, E. Korperbau und Charakter. Berlin, 1931.Google Scholar
  8. Loevinger, Jane. Theory and techniques of assessment. Ann. Rev. Psychol, 1959, 10, 287–316.Google Scholar
  9. Selg, H. Der Hand Test. Diagnostica, 1965, 11, 134–137.Google Scholar
  10. Vaschide, N. Essai sur la psychologie de la main. Paris: Riviere Marcel, 1909.Google Scholar
  11. Wagner, E. E. The interaction of aggressive movement responses and anatomy responses on the Rorschach in producing anxiety. J. proj. Tech., 1961a, 25, 212–215.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Wagner, E. E. The use of drawings of hands as a projective medium for differentiating normals and schizophrenics. J. clin. Psychol., 1961b, 17, 279–280.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Wagner, E. E. The Hand Test. Manual for Administration, Scoring, and Interpretation. Akron, Ohio: Mark James, 1962a.Google Scholar
  14. Wagner, E. E. The use of drawings of hands as a projective medium for differentiating neurotics and schizophrenics. J. clin. Psychol., 1962b, 18, 208–209.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Wagner, E. E. Application of the Hand test indicators of antisocial action tendencies in adults to teenage Juvenile delinquents. Paper read at Eastern Psychological Association, April, 1962c.Google Scholar
  16. Wagner, E. E. Hand test content indicators of overt psychosexual maladjustment in neurotic males. J. proj. Tech. Pers. Assess., 1963, 27, 357–358.Google Scholar
  17. Wagner, E. E., & Copper, J. Differentiation of satisfactory and unsatisfactory employees at Goodwill Industries with the Hand Test. J. proj. Tech. Pers. Assess., 1963, 27, 354–355.Google Scholar
  18. Wagner, E. E., & Hawkins, R. Differentiation of assaultive delinquents with the Hand Test. J. proj. Tech. Pers. Assess., 1964, 28, 363–365.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Wagner, E. E., & Hawver, D. A. Correlations between psychological tests and sheltered workshop performance for severely retarded adults. Amer. J. ment. Def., 1965, 69, 685–691.Google Scholar
  20. Wagner, E. E., & Medvedeff, E. Differentiation of aggressive behavior of institutionalized schizophrenics with the Hand Test. J. proj. Tech. Pers. Assess., 1963, 27, 111–113.Google Scholar
  21. Wenk, E. Perceptual differences between aggressive and nonaggressive CYA wards. Unpublished manuscript, 1966.Google Scholar
  22. Wolff, Charlotte. The Human Hand. New York: Knopf, 1943.Google Scholar
  23. Wolff, W. The Expression of Personality. New York: Harper, 1943.Google Scholar

Mosaics: The Lowenfeld Mosaic Test (LMT)

  1. Ames, Louise, B., & Ilg, Frances, L. Mosaic Patterns of American Children. New York: Harper & Row, 1962.Google Scholar
  2. Ames, Louise B., & Ilg, Frances, L. Age changes in children’s mosaic responses from five to ten years. Genet. Psychol. Monogr., 1964, 69, 195–245.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Ames, Louise B., Ilg, Frances, L., & August, Judith. The Lowenfeld Mosaic Test: norms for five to ten year old American public school children and comparative study of 3 groups. Genet. Psychol. Monogr., 1964, 70, 57–95.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Ascough, J. C, & Dana, R. H. Concurrent validation of the mosaic and Bender-Gestalt tests. J. consult. Psychol, 1962, 26, 430–434.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Barron, F. The psychology of imagination. Scient. Amer., 1958199 (3), 150–166.Google Scholar
  6. Bell, J. E. Projective Techniques New York: Longman, Green, 1948.Google Scholar
  7. Bowen, Barbara. An extension of the Mosaic test designed to increase its prognostic value. J. proj. Tech., 1954, 18, 5–16.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Carr, Gwen, L. Mosaic differences in non-institutionalized retarded children. Amer. J. ment. Def., 1958, 62, 908–911.Google Scholar
  9. Colm, Hanna. The value of projective methods in the psychological examination of children: the Mosaic test in conjunction with the Rorschach and Binet tests. Rorschach Res. Exch., J. proj. Tech., 1948, 12, 216–233.Google Scholar
  10. Diamond, B. L., & Schmale, H. The Mosaic test. An evaluation of its clinical application. Amer. J. Orthopsychiat., 1944, 14, 237–250.Google Scholar
  11. Dorken, H., Jr. The Mosaic test: review. J. proj. Tech., 1952, 16, 287–296.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Dorken, H., Jr. The Mosaic test: a second review. J. proj. Tech., 1956, 20, 164–171.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Hansen, I. The Mosaic test as a diagnostic indicator of schizophrenia. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of the Pacific, 1954.Google Scholar
  14. Himmelweit, H. T., & Eysenck, H. J. An experimental analysis of the Mosaic projection test. Brit. J. Med. Psychol., 1945, 20, 283–294.Google Scholar
  15. Home, E. P., & Lane, W. P. Constancy or creativity in patterning Mosaic test performance. J. genet. Psychol, 1960, 63, 165–170.Google Scholar
  16. Johnson, T. F. The function of the Mosaic test in clinical practice. J. gen. Psychol., 1957, 56, 51–58.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Kerr, M. The validity of the mosaic test. Amer. J. Orthopsychiat., 1939, 9, 232–236.Google Scholar
  18. Levin, M. L. Validation of the Lowenfeld Mosaic Test. J. consult. Psychol., 1956, 20, 239–248.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Lowenfeld, Margaret. The mosaic test. Amer. J. Orthopsychiat., 1949, 19, 537–550.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Lowenfeld, Margaret. The Lowenfeld Mosaic Test. London: Newman Neame, 1954.Google Scholar
  21. Maher, B., & Martin, A. Mosaic productions in cerebro-arteriosclerosis. J. consult. Psychol., 1954, 18, 40–42.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. McCullough, T., & Girdner, J. Use of the Lowenfeld Mosaic test with mental defectives. Amer. J. ment. Def., 1949, 53, 486–496.Google Scholar
  23. Metz, J. R. A method for measuring aspects of ego strength. J. proj. Tech., 1961, 25, 457–470.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Pascal, G. R. Gestalt functions: the Bender-Gestalt, Mosaic, and World tests. In Brower, B. & Abt, L. (Eds.). Progress in Clinical Psychology, Vol. I. New York: Grune and Stratton, 1952, chapt.Google Scholar
  25. Pelz, K., Pike, F., & Ames, Louise B. A proposed battery of childhood tests for discriminating between different levels of intactness of functions in elderly subjects. J. genet. Psychol., 1962, 100, 23–40.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Reiman, Gertrude, M. The Mosaic test: its applicability and validity. Amer. J. Orthopsychiat., 1950, 20, 600–616.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Rioch, Margaret, J. The mosaic test as a diagnostic instrument and as a technique for illustrating intellectual disorganization. J. proj. Tech., 1954, 18, 89–94.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Shotwell, Anna, M., & Lawrence, E. S. Mosaic patterns of institutionalized mental defectives. Amer. J. ment. Def., 1951, 56, 161–168.Google Scholar
  29. Stewart, Ursula, & Leland, Lorraine, A. American versus English mosaics. J. proj. Tech., 1952, 16, 246–248.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Stewart, Ursula, & Leland, Lorraine, A. Lowenfeld mosaics made by first grade children. J. proj. Tech., 1955, 19, 62–66.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Stewart, Ursula, Leland, Lorraine, & Strieter, Edith. Mosaic patterns of eighth grade children. J. proj. Tech., 1957, 21, 73–79.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Walker, R. N. Children’s mosaic designs: a normative and validating study of the Lowenfeld mosaic test. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota, 1957.Google Scholar
  33. Wertham, F. The mosaic test: technique and psychopathological deductions. In Abt, L. E., & Bellak, L. (Eds.). Projective Psychology: Clinical Approaches to the Total Personality. New York: Knopf, 1950.Google Scholar
  34. Wertham, F., & Golden, Lili. A differential diagnostic method of integrating Mosaics and colored block designs. Amer. J. Psychiat., 1941, 98, 124–131.Google Scholar
  35. Wideman, H. Development and initial validation of an objective scoring method for the Lowenfeld Mosaic Test. J. proj. Tech., 1955, 19, 177–191.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Zucker, Louise. The clinical significance of the Mosaic and Rorschach methods. Amer. J. Psychother., 1950, 4, 473–474.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Symbols: Kahn Test of Symbol Arrangement (KTSA)

  1. Abidin, R. R. KTSA sorting norms for school age children. J. clin. Psychol., 1966, 22, 85–90.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Abidin, R. R. KTSA symbolization norms for school age children: interpretive notes. Unpublished manuscript, Lackland AFB, 1965.Google Scholar
  3. Anderson, L., & Clack, G. S. Interscorer reliability and the KTSA. Unpublished manuscript, Lackland AFB, 1966.Google Scholar
  4. Craddick, R., & Stern, M. Note on the scorer reliability of the KTSA. J. clin. Psychol., 1965, 21, 197.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Fils, D. H. Comparative performance of schizophrenics and normals on an object symbol arrangement test. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Southern California, 1950.Google Scholar
  6. Fink, H. H., & Kahn, T. C. A comparison of normal and emotionally ill children on the KTSA. J. educ. Res., 1959, 53, 35–36.Google Scholar
  7. Hammer, E. F. Expressive aspects of projective drawings. In Hammer, E. F. (Ed.). The Clinical Application of Projective Drawings. Springfield, Ill.: Charles C Thomas, 1958.Google Scholar
  8. Harvey, O. J., Hunt, D. E., & Schroder, H. G. Conceptual Systems and Personality Organization. New York: Wiley, 1961.Google Scholar
  9. Hedlund, J. L., & Mills, D. H. Cross validation of the KTSA with a psychiatric population. J. clin. Psychol., 1964, 20, 100–103.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Hill, L. K., & Latham, W. R., (Eds.). Kahn Test of Symbol Arrangement. Revised edition (mimeo). Lackland AFB, Texas, 1962.Google Scholar
  11. Kahn, T. C. Manual for the Kahn test of symbol arrangement. Beverly Hills: Western Psychological Service, 1949 (revised, 1953).Google Scholar
  12. Kahn, T. C. Comparative performance of psychotics with brain damage and non- psychotics on an original symbol arrangement test. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Southern California, 1950.Google Scholar
  13. Kahn, T. C. An original test of symbol arrangement validated on organic psychotics. J. consult. Psychol., 1951, 5, 439–444.Google Scholar
  14. Kahn, T. C. Cross validation of the organic brain pathology scale for a test of symbol arrangement. J. consult. Psychol., 1955, 19, 130.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Kahn, T. C. Kahn test of symbol arrangement: administration and scoring. Percept, mot. Skills, 1956, 6, 299–334 (suppl. no. 4).Google Scholar
  16. Kahn, T. C. The Kahn test of symbol arrangement: clinical manual. Percept, mot. Skills., 1957, 7, 97–168 (suppl. no. 1).Google Scholar
  17. Kahn, T. C. Auxiliary Evaluation Guide for use with Kahn test of symbol arrangement. Psychological test specialists, 1960.Google Scholar
  18. Kahn, T. C, & Giffen, M. B. Psychological Techniques in Diagnosis and Evaluation. New York: Pergamon Press, 1960.Google Scholar
  19. Kahn, T. C, Ferriman, M., & Ferraro, C. The use of the KTSA in differentiating between normals, neurotics, character disorders, borderline schizophrenics, and psy- chotics. Unpublished manuscript, Wright-Patterson AFB, 1956.Google Scholar
  20. Kahn, T. C, Harter, H., Rider, P., & Lum, M. D. Reliability and validity of the KTSA as a technique in screening schizophrenics, psychotics with brain damage, and non-psychotics. Unpublished manuscript, Wright-Patterson AFB, 1957.Google Scholar
  21. Kenny, J.A. Maladjusted children: a comparison of 216 normal and maladjusted children on the basis of their performance on psychological tests. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Johannes Guttenberg University, Mainz, Germany, 1962.Google Scholar
  22. L’Abate, L., Boelling, G. M., Hutton, R., & Mathews, D. L., Jr. The diagnostic usefulness of four potential tests of brain damage. J. onsult. Psychol., 1962, 26, 479.Google Scholar
  23. L’Abate, L., & Craddick, R. A. The Kahn test of symbol arrangement (KTSA): a critical review. J. din. Psychol., 1965, 21, 115–135.Google Scholar
  24. L’Abate, L., Vogler, R. E., Friedman, W. H., & Chused, T. The diagnostic usefulness of two tests of brain damage. J. din. Psychol., 1963, 19, 87–91.Google Scholar
  25. Murphy, P. D., Ferriman, M. R., & Bolinger, R. W. The Kahn test of symbol arrangement as an aid to psychodiagnosis. J. consult. Psychol., 1957, 21, 503–505.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Theiner, E. C. Differences on abstract thought processes as a function of sex. J. gen. Psychol, 1965, 73, 285–290.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Theiner, E. C., & Giffen, M. B. A comparison of abstract thought processes among three cultures. In McKenzie, R. E. (Ed.). Proceedings of the 4th Annual Conference of AF Clinical Psychologists. Brooks AFB, Texas: USAF SAM, 1963.Google Scholar
  28. White, P. O., & McLeod, H. W. A multiple discriminant analysis comparing psychotic, neurotic, and character disorder patients on the Kahn test of symbol arrangement. Ontario Psychol. Assoc. Quart., 1963, 26, 1–5.Google Scholar
  29. Whittick, A. Symbols, Signs, and Their Meaning. Massachusetts: C. T. Branford, 1960.Google Scholar
  30. Wyman, B. A. The effect of sex differences, masculine-feminine interests, and opposite sex roles on performance on the Kahn test of symbol arrangement. Unpublished master’s thesis, New Mexico State University, New Mexico, 1963.Google Scholar

Expressive Motor Activity: Drawing Completion Techniques

  1. Ames, Louise, B., & Hellersberg, E. G. The Horn-Hellersberg test: responses of three to eleven year old children. Rorschach Res. Exch. J. proj. Tech., 1949, 13, 415–432.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Ames, Louise, B., & Ilg, Frances. Mosaic Patterns of American Children. New York: Harper & Row, 1962.Google Scholar
  3. Aronfreed, J. M. Moral behavior and sex identity. In Miller, D. R. & Swanson, G. E. (Eds.). Inner Conflict and Defense. New York: Holt, 1960. Pp. 177-193.Google Scholar
  4. Bauer, L. Erfahrungen mit dem Warteggtest auf unserer Kinderstation. Nervenarzt., 1952, 23, 52–55.Google Scholar
  5. Bell, J. E. Projective Techniques. New York: Longman, Green, 1948. Pp. 406–409.Google Scholar
  6. Bell, J. E. The case of Gregor-psychological test data. Rorschach Res. Exch. J. prof. Tech., 1949, 13, 155–205.Google Scholar
  7. Bochnik, H. J. Tests unter alkoholbelastung. II. Wartegg-Zeichentest und psychiatrische iagnostik. Z. diagnost. Psychol., 1954, 2, 33–55.Google Scholar
  8. Engel, Illona, M. A factor analytic study of items from five masculinity-femininity ests. Dissert. Abstr., 1962, 307–308.Google Scholar
  9. Erikson, E. H. Sex differences in the play configuration of preadolescents. Arner. J. rthopsychiat., 1951, 21, 667–692.Google Scholar
  10. Franck, Kate. Preference for sex symbols and their personality correlates. Genet Psychol. Monogr., 1946, 33, 73–123.Google Scholar
  11. Franck, Kate. Franck Drawing completion test: preliminary manual. Melborne, Australia: Australian Counsel for Educational Research (undated, about 1952).Google Scholar
  12. Franck, Kate. Manual for completion test (masculinity-femininity scale). Berkeley, Calif.: E. S. Mimopolous, 1949 (mimeo). Reproduced by Lansky, L., 1958.Google Scholar
  13. Franck, Kate, & Rosen, E. A projective test of masculinity-femininity. J. consult. Psychol, 1949, 13, 247–256.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Fluckiger, F., Tripp, C, & Weinberg, G. A review of experimental research in graphology, 1933-1960. Psychol. Rep. Percept, mot. Skills, 1961, 12, 67–90.Google Scholar
  15. Gough, H. G. Identifying psychological femininity. Educ. psychol. Measmt., 1952, 12, 427–439.Google Scholar
  16. Gleser, Goldine, C. Review of Kinget drawing completion test. In Buros, O. K. (Ed.). Fifth Mental Measurements Yearbook. New Jersey: Gryphon Press, 1959. Pp. 130.Google Scholar
  17. Greenstein, J. Father characteristics and sex-role identification in a delinquent group. Dissert. Abstr., 1961, 22, 1716.Google Scholar
  18. Hellersberg, Elizabeth, F. The Horn-Hellersberg Test and adjustment to reality. Amer. J. Orthopsychiat., 1945, 15, 690–710.Google Scholar
  19. Hellersberg, Elizabeth, F. The Individual’s Relation to Reality in Our Culture. Springfield, 111.: Charles C Thomas, 1950.Google Scholar
  20. Hellersberg, Elizabeth, F. The Horn-Hellersberg Test. Monogr. Soc. Res. Child Developm., 1953, 16, 138–170, 214-316.Google Scholar
  21. Hellersberg, Elizabeth, F. The Horn-Hellersberg Test. Manual (mimeo), 1961, (3rd edition).Google Scholar
  22. Hippius, M. Graphischer Ausdruck von Gefiihlen. Z. Psychol., 1936, 51, 257.Google Scholar
  23. Jaskar, J. O. Levels of body image assessment of hospitalized and non-hospitalized subjects. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Portland, 1962.Google Scholar
  24. Kass, W. Review of Kinget drawing completion test. In Buros, O. K. (Ed.). Fifth Mental Measurements Yearbook. New Jersey: Gryphon Press, 1959.Google Scholar
  25. Kooser, E. de T. The relation of masculinity-femininity orientation to self-report anxiety. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of North Carolina, 1955.Google Scholar
  26. Kinget, G. Marian. The Drawing Completion Test. New York: Grune and Stratton, 1952.Google Scholar
  27. Kinget, G. Marian. The drawing completion test. In Hammer, E. F. (Ed.). The Clinical Application of Projective Techniques. Springfield, Ill.: Charles C Thomas, 1958. Pp. 344–364.Google Scholar
  28. Krout, Johanna. Symbol Elaboration Test (SET): the reliability and validity of a new projective technique. Psychol. Monogr., 1950, 64, 1–67.Google Scholar
  29. Lansky, L. Mechanisms of defense: sex identity and defenses against aggression. In Miller, D. & Swanson, G. E. (Eds.). Inner Conflict and Defense. New York: Holt, 1960. Pp. 272–288.Google Scholar
  30. Lansky, L. The stability over time and under stress of conscious and unconscious masculinity-femininity. Amer. Psychol, 1962, 17, 302–303.Google Scholar
  31. Lansky, L. The family structure also affects the model: sex-role identification in parents of preschool children. Merrill-Palmer Quart., 1964, 10, 39–50.Google Scholar
  32. Lansky, L. References to the Franck drawing completion test. Unpublished manuscript, 1965.Google Scholar
  33. McCaulley, Mary, H. Dimensions of masculinity-femininity in relation to field dependence, dogmatism, and other estimates of perceptual-cognitive differentiation. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Temple University, 1964.Google Scholar
  34. Murray, H. A. Explorations in Personality. New York: Oxford University Press, 1938.Google Scholar
  35. Olson, J. T. The test-retest reliability of the Kinget drawing completion test. Unpublished master’s thesis, Fresno State College, Fresno, California, 1955.Google Scholar
  36. Pikunas, J. Operant conditioning effects upon drawing content. J. proj. Tech. Pers. Assess., 1966, 30, 172–176.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Pikunas, J., & Carberry, H. Standardization of the graphoscopic scale: the content of children’s drawings. J. din. Psychol., 1961, 17, 297–301.Google Scholar
  38. Pintner, R., & Toops, H. A. A drawing completion test. J. applied Psychol, 1918, 2, 164–173.Google Scholar
  39. Reed, M. R. The masculinity-femininity dimension in normal and psychotic subjects. J. abnorm. soc. Psychol, 1957, 55, 289–294.Google Scholar
  40. Sander, F. Experimented Ergebnisse der Gestaltpsychologie. Berlin Kongr. Exp. Psychol, 1928, 23-38.Google Scholar
  41. Sanford, R. N., & others. Physique, Personality, and Scholarship. Wash., D. C. National Res. Council, Soc. Res. Child Develpm., 1943.Google Scholar
  42. Scarpellini, C. Diagnosis della personality col reattivo di realizzazione grafica-dal reattivo di disegno di E. Wartegg (WZT). Contrib. Inst. PsicoL, 1962, 26, 1–83.Google Scholar
  43. Shepler, B. F. A comparison of masculinity-feminitsy measures. J. consult. Psychol, 1951, 15, 484–486.Google Scholar
  44. Takala, M. Studies of the Wartegg drawing completion test. Ann. Acad. Scient.Finl, 1964, 131, 1–112.Google Scholar
  45. Takala, M., & Hakkarainen. M. Über Faktorenstruktur und Validitat des Wartegg-Zeichentests. Ann. Acad. Scient. Finl, 1953, 81 (ser. B), 1–95.Google Scholar
  46. Teepen, Nancy. Sibling relationships in sex-role identification. Unpublished master’s thesis, Ohio State University, 1963.Google Scholar
  47. Wartegg, E. Gestaltung und Charakter. Z. angew. Psychol Beih., 1939, 84. Google Scholar
  48. Weitzenhoffer, A. M. Hypnotic susceptibility as related to masculinity-femininity. Dissert. Abstr., 1957, 17, 1397.Google Scholar
  49. Winer, F. The relationship of certain attitudes toward the mother to sex-role identity. Dissert. Abstr., 1962, 22, 4416.Google Scholar

Acknowledgments

  1. Hellersberg, Elizabeth, F. The Horn-Hellersberg Test and adjustment to reality, Amer. J. Orthopsychiat., 1945, 15. Google Scholar
  2. Lowenfeld, Margaret. In Stern, E. Handbuch der Klinischen Psychologie, Band I. Die Tests in der Klinischen Psychologie Abteilung II. Rashen, Switzerland, Fig. 1, 665.Google Scholar
  3. Szondi, Lipot. Experimentelle Diagnose der Triebe, 6th ed. Berne, Switzerland: Hans Huber Publishers, 1966.Google Scholar
  4. Wartegg, E. In Kinget, G. Marian. The Drawing Completion Test. New York: Grune and Stratton, 1952, ii.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1968

Authors and Affiliations

  • Leonard P. Campos

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations