Advertisement

Holtzman Inkblot Technique

  • Wayne H. Holtzman
Chapter

Abstract

Drawing heavily upon studies with the Rorschach, the Holtzman Ink blot Technique (HIT) is a new projective method designed to overcome psychometric limitations in the Rorschach by constructing completely new sets of inkblots.1 Unlike the Rorschach, which has only ten inkblots in a single form, the HIT consists of two parallel forms, A and B, each of which contains 45 inkblots constituting the test series and two practice blots, X and Y, that are identical in both forms. Thus, standardized responses can be obtained from a total of 92 different inkblots rather than just ten.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Barger, P. M., & Sechrest, L. Convergent and discriminant validity of four Holtzman Inkblot Test variables. J. psychol Stud., 1961, 12, 227-236. Barnes, C. Prediction of brain damage using the Holtzman Inkblot Technique and other selected variables. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Iowa, 1963.Google Scholar
  2. Beck, S. J. Rorschach’s Test, Vol. I, Basic Processes. (Second edition, revised). New York: Grune and Stratton, 1949.Google Scholar
  3. Block, W. E., Greenfield, L. Adaptation to inkblot stimuli: effects of order of presentation, context and stimuli characteristics. J. clin. Psychol., 1965, 21, 301–304.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brasfield, C, Papageorgis, D. Manifest anxiety and the effect of a dissonant self-relevant communication on self-perception. Proc. 73rd ann. Conv. Amer. Psychol. Assoc, 1965, 193–194. Washington, D.C.: APA.Google Scholar
  5. Clark, C. M., Veldman, D. J., Thorpe, J. S. Convergent and divergent thinking of talented adolescents. J. educ. Psychol., 1965, 56, 157–163.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cleveland, S. E. Body image changes associated with personality reorganization. J. consult. Psychol., 1960, 24, 256–261.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cleveland, S. E., Fisher, S. A comparison of psychological characteristics and physio logical reactivity in ulcer and rheumatoid arthritis groups. Psychosom. Med., 1960, 22, 283–289.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Cleveland, S. E., Morton, R. B. Group behavior and body image: A follow-up study. Hum. Relat., 1962, 15, 77–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cleveland, S. E., Sikes, M. P. Body image in chronic alcoholics and non-alcoholic psychiatric patients. J. proj. Tech. pers. Assess., 1966, 30, 265–269.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Codkind, D. Attitudes toward the imaginary: Their relationship to level of personality integration. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Kansas, 1964.Google Scholar
  11. Connors, C. K. Effects of brief psychotherapy, drugs, and type of disturbance on Holtzman Inkblot scores in children. Proc. 73rd ann. conv. Amer. Psychol. Assoc, 1965, 201–202. Washington, D. C: APA.Google Scholar
  12. Cook de Leonard, C. Problems in the translation of Spanish (Mexican) protocols into English. Proc. Ninth Cong. Interamer. Soc. Psychol., Miami, Fla., 1964, 271-277.Google Scholar
  13. Cronbach, L. J. Statistical methods applied to Rorschach scores: a review. Psychol. Bull., 1949, 46, 393–429.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Elizur, A. Content analysis of the Rorschach with regard to anxiety and hostility. Rorschach Res. Exch., 1949, 13, 247–284.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Fisher, S. A further appraisal of the body boundary concept. J. consult. Psychol., 1963, 27, 62–74.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fisher, S., Cleveland, S. E. Body Image and Personality. Princeton, N. J.: Van Nos-trand, 1958.Google Scholar
  17. Gorham, D. R. Development of a computer scoring system for inkblot responses. Proc. Ninth Cong. Interamer. Soc. Psychol., Miami, Fla., 1964, 258-270.Google Scholar
  18. Gorham, D. R. Validity and reliability studies of a computer-based scoring system for inkblot responses. J. consult. Psychol., 1967, 31, 65–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Herron, E. W. Psychometric characteristics of a thirty-item version of the group method of the Holtzman Inkblot Technique. J. clin. Psychol., 1963, 19, 450–453.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Herron, E. W. Changes in inkblot perception with presentation of the Holtzman Ink blot Technique as an “intelligence test.” J. proj. Tech. pers. Assess., 1964, 28, 442–447.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Herron, E. W. Personality factors associated with the acquisition of the conditioned eyelid response. J. pers. soc. Psychol., 1965, 2, 775–777.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hertz, Marguerite R. The use and misuse of the Rorschach method. I. Variations in Rorschach procedure. J. proj. Tech., 1959, 23, 33–48.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hill, E. F. Affect aroused by Color, a function of stimulus strength. J. proj. Tech. pers. Assess., 1966, 30, 23–30. Bull. Menninger Clin., 1963, 27, 84-95.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Holtzman Inkblot Technique. The Psychological Corporation, 304 East 45th Street, New York, N.Y.Google Scholar
  25. Holtzman, W. H. Inkblot perception and personality: the meaning of inkblot variables. Bull. Menninger Clin., 1963, 27, 84–95.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Holtzman, W. H. Recurring dilemmas in personality assessment. J. proj. Tech. pers. Assess., 1964, 28, 144–150.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Holtzman, W. H. Cross-cultural research on personality development. Hum. Develpm., 1965a, 8, 65–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Holtzman, W. H. Personality structure. Annu. Rev. Psychol., 1965b, 16, 119–156.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Holtzman, W. H. Intelligence, cognitive style and personality: a developmental approach. In Brim, O. G., Jr., Crutchfield, R. S. Holtzman, W. H. Intelligence: Perspectives 1965. New York: Harcourt, Brace, & World, 1966.Google Scholar
  30. Holtzman, W. H., Gorham, D. R., Moran, L. J. A factor-analytic study of schizophrenic thought processes. J. abnorm. soc. Psychol., 1964, 69, 355–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Holtzman, W. H., Moseley, E. C, Reinehr, R. C, Abbot, E. Comparison of the group method and the standard individual version of the Holtzman Inkblot Tech nique. J. clin. Psychol., 1963, 19, 441–449.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Holtzman, W. H., Santos, J. F., Bouquet, S., Barth, P. The Peace Corps in Brazil. Austin, Texas: University of Texas, 1966.Google Scholar
  33. Holtzman, W. H., Thorpe, J. S., Swartz, J. D., Herron, E. W. Inkblot Perception and Personality. Austin, Texas: University of Texas Press, 1961.Google Scholar
  34. Knudsen, A. K., Gorham, D. R. Moseley, E. C. Universal popular responses to ink blots in five cultures: Denmark, Germany, Hong Kong, Mexico, and United States. J. proj. Tech. pers. Assess., 1966, 30, 135–142.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Lord, Edith. Experimentally induced variations in Rorschach performance. Psychol. Monogr., 1950, 64, No. 10 (Whole no. 316).Google Scholar
  36. Megargee, E. I. The performance of juvenile delinquents on the Holtzman Inkblot Technique: a normative study. J. proj. Tech. pers. Assess., 1965a, 29, 504–512.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Megargee, E. I. The relation between Barrier scores and aggressive behavior. J. abnorm. Psychol, 1965b, 70, 307–311.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Megargee, E. I. Undercontrolled and overcontrolled personality types in extreme anti social aggression. Psychol. Monogr., 1966a, 80, No. 611, 1–29.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Megargee, E. I. Relation of response length to Holtzman Inkblot Technique scores. J. consult. Psychol., 1966b, 30, 415–419.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Megargee, E. I., Lockwood, V., Cato, J. L., Jones, J. K. Effects of differences in examiner, tone of administration, and sex of subject on scores of the Holtzman Inkblot Technique. Proc. 74th ann. Conv. Amer. Psychol. Assoc, 1966, 235–236. Washington, D. C.: APA.Google Scholar
  41. Megargee, E. I., Cook, P. E. The relation of TAT and inkblot aggressive content scales with each other and with criteria of overt aggressiveness in juvenile delinquents. J. proj. Tech. Pers. Assess., 1967, 31, 48–60.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Moseley, E. C. Psychodiagnosis on the basis of the Holtzman Inkblot Technique. J. proj. Tech. 1963, 27, 86–91.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Moseley, E. C. Some results of cross-cultural computer scoring of Mexican, Panamanian, Chinese and American students. Proc. Ninth Congr. Interamer. Soc. Psychol, Miami, Fla., 1964, 277-281.Google Scholar
  44. Moseley, E. C, Duffey, R. F., Sherman, L. J. An extension of the construct validity of the Holtzman Inkblot Technique. J. clin. Psychol, 1963, 19, 186–192.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Moseley, E.C., Gorham, D.R., & Hill, E. Computer scoring of inkblot perceptions. Percept mot. Skills, 1963, 17, 498PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Moseley, E. C. Paper given in symposium on transcultural research at the Tenth Inter-American Congress of Psychology, Lima, Peru, April 3-7, 1966.Google Scholar
  47. Mueller, W. J., Abeles, N. The components of empathy and their relationship to tht projection of human movement responses. J. proj. Tech. pers. Assess., 1964, 28, 322–330.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Murstein, B. I. The projection of hostility on the Rorschach, and as a result of ego-threat. J. proj. Tech., 1956, 20, 418–428.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Otten, M. W., Van de Castle, R. L. A comparison of set “A” of the Holtzman ink blots with the Rorschach by means of the semantic differential. J. proj. Tech. & pers. Assess., 1963, 27, 453–460.Google Scholar
  50. Palmer, J. O. Alterations in Rorschach’s Experience Balance under conditions of food and sleep deprivation: A construct validation study. J. proj. Tech. pers. Assess., 1963, 27, 208–213.Google Scholar
  51. Phillips, L., Kaden, S., Waldman, M. Rorschach indices of developmental level. J. genet. Psychol, 1959, 94, 267–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Rapaport, D., Schafer, R., Gill, M. Diagnostic Psychological Testing, Vol. II. Chicago: Year Book Publishers, 1946.Google Scholar
  53. Reitman, E. E. Changes in body image following sensory deprivation in schizophrenic and control groups. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Houston, 1962.Google Scholar
  54. Richter, R. H., Winter, W. D. Holtzman inkblot correlates of creative potential. J. proj. Tech. pers. Assess., 1966, 30, 62–67.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Ruebush, B. K. Children’s behavior as a function of anxiety and defensiveness. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, 1960.Google Scholar
  56. Sells, S. B., Frese, F. J., Jr., Lancaster, W. H. Research on the psychiatric selection of flying personnel. II. Progress on development of SAM Group Ink-Blot Test. Project no. 21-37-002, no. 2. Randolph Field Texas: USAF School of Aviation Medicine, 1952.Google Scholar
  57. Simkins, L. Examiner reinforcement and situational variables in a projective testing situation. J. consult. Psychol, 1960, 24, 541–547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Steffy, R. A., Becker, W. C. Measurement of the severity of disorder in schizophrenia by means of the Holtzman Inkblot Test. J. consult. Psychol., 1961, 25, 555.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Swartz, J. D. Developmental aspects of perceptual-cognitive functioning: preliminary findings from the first two years of a six-year longitudinal study. Proc. Ninth Congr. Interamer. Soc. Psychol., Miami, Fla., 1964, 249-257.Google Scholar
  60. Swartz, J. D. Performance of high- and low-anxious children on the Holtzman Inkblot Technique. Child Develpm., 1965, 36, 569–575.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Swartz, J. D. The roles of culture, age, sex, and father’s occupational level in children’s responses to the Holtzman Inkblot Technique. In Hereford, C. F. Natalicio, L. (Eds.). Aportaciones de la Psicologia a la Investigacion Transcultural. Mexico 1, D.F.: Editorial F. Trillas, S.A., 1967. Pp. 130–142.Google Scholar
  62. Swartz, J. D., Holtzman, W. H. Group method of administration for the Holtzman Inkblot Technique. J. clin. Psychol., 1963, 19, 433–441.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Tamm, M. Resultados preliminares de un estudio transcultural y desarrollo de la personalidad de nifios mexicanos y norteamericanos. In Hereford, C. F. Natalicio, L. (Eds.). Aportaciones de la Psicologia a la Investigacion Transcultural. Mexico 1, D.F.: Editorial F. Trillas, S.A., 1967. Pp. 159–164.Google Scholar
  64. Thorpe, J. S. Level of perceptual development as reflected in responses to the Holtz man Inkblot Technique. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Texas, 1960.Google Scholar
  65. Thorpe, J. S., Swartz, J. D. The role of intelligence and social status in rejections on the Holtzman Inkblot Technique. J. proj. Tech. pers. Assess., 1963, 27, 248–251.Google Scholar
  66. Thorpe, J. S., Swartz, J. D. Level of perceptual development as reflected in responses to the Holtzman Inkblot Technique. J. proj. Tech. pers. Assess., 1965, 29, 380–386.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. Thorpe, J. S., Swartz, J. D. Perceptual organization: A developmental analysis by means of the Holtzman Inkblot Technique. J. proj. Tech. pers. Assess., 1966, 30, 447–451.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. Van de Castle, R. L., Spicher, R. S. A semantic differential investigation of color on the Holtzman. J. proj. Tech. pers. Assess., 1964, 28, 492–498.Google Scholar
  69. Whitaker, L., Jr. The Rorschach and Holtzman as measures of Pathognomic Verbal ization. J. consult. Psychol., 1965, 29, 181–183.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Young, H. H., Jr. A test of Witkin’s field-dependence hypothesis. J. abnorm. soc. Psychol, 1959, 59, 188–192.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Zubin, J., Eron, L. Experimental Abnormal Psychology(Preliminary edition). New York: New York State Psychiatric Institute, 1953.Google Scholar
  72. Zubin, J. Failures of the Rorschach technique. J. proj. Tech., 1954, 18, 303–315.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1968

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wayne H. Holtzman

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations