Some psychologist and psychiatrist claim that they can identify a transwoman from black ink (RO-test)test. How reliable it is? How other transwomen expriences? I have been in it two times.
Answers both time: undeveloped male identity with oidipal problems.

Quote from: Secretgirl on September 02, 2008, 08:12:27 AM
Some psychologist and psychiatrist claim that they can identify a transwoman from black ink (RO-test)test. How reliable it is? ..

The tests are meaningless and tell you more about the examiner than the test subject, a branch of psuedo-science similarly with lie detector tests.

I was going to make a long reply about the questionable at best use of rorschach style tests but a web cartoon will have to suffice.

What you see is open to interpretation, as are the results.

Projective tests like RO and TAT have low diagnostic reliability.

Quote from: Secretgirl on September 02, 2008, 08:12:27 AM
Some psychologist and psychiatrist claim that they can identify a transwoman from black ink (RO-test)test. How reliable it is? 

It's a load of tripe!

You mean like this?



The first of the ten cards in the Rorschach inkblot test. It has been reported that popular responses include bat, badge and coat of arms. (^ Mons, W (1950). Principles and Practice Of the Rorschach Personality Test, 2nd, Faber, 31)

For me, it looks like an unusually fat pixie standing on two rocks, her figure reflected in water or on glass. This picture, of course, is sideways.
You have witnessed, ladies and gentlemen, the ink-blot interpretation of a mad man.

Quote from: Elwood on September 06, 2008, 11:27:42 PM
You mean like this?



The first of the ten cards in the Rorschach inkblot test. It has been reported that popular responses include bat, badge and coat of arms. (^ Mons, W (1950). Principles and Practice Of the Rorschach Personality Test, 2nd, Faber, 31)

For me, it looks like an unusually fat pixie standing on two rocks, her figure reflected in water or on glass. This picture, of course, is sideways.
You have witnessed, ladies and gentlemen, the ink-blot interpretation of a mad man.

I see two Chihuahuas. What does that make me?

Quote from: iFindMeHere on September 06, 2008, 11:30:55 PMI see two Chihuahuas. What does that make me?

Hey, I see that too, now.  But I like my fat pixie better.

I think it looks like two fat ladies skipping or dancing coming towards you.

Quote from: Elwood on September 06, 2008, 11:33:04 PM

Quote from: iFindMeHere on September 06, 2008, 11:30:55 PMI see two Chihuahuas. What does that make me?

Hey, I see that too, now.  But I like my fat pixie better.

Subjectivity FTW. I think it makes me a nelly but i knew that already.

It looks like a symmetrical ink stain on a piece of paper.  And symmetry is just so overdone.  Boring really.

Quote from: Elwood on September 06, 2008, 11:27:42 PM
You mean like this?



The first of the ten cards in the Rorschach inkblot test. It has been reported that popular responses include bat, badge and coat of arms. (^ Mons, W (1950). Principles and Practice Of the Rorschach Personality Test, 2nd, Faber, 31)

For me, it looks like an unusually fat pixie standing on two rocks, her figure reflected in water or on glass. This picture, of course, is sideways.
You have witnessed, ladies and gentlemen, the ink-blot interpretation of a mad man.

Um... I see an angel in a dress, her arms raised skyward, a belt around her waist with a white buckle. But the strange thing is that, to me, it's... obvious. And I can't really see it as anything else. Believe me, I've tried.

Lol, curious thing, imagination.

This is from the biography of a woman who transitioned in the early eighties:

QuoteThe tests I had been given, the Rorschach Ink Blot Test, as well as other visual tests involving pictures of people and scenes, were not grounded in any rational science. In fact, they are essentially arbitrary, culturally based catalogs of expected interpretations, based on a laughable model of what it means to be female or male of mind.

For instance, if one sees in a random inkblot suitably feminine images, such as flowers and cooking pots, then one is judged female. If one sees cars and planes, then one is judged a boy. It is that silly. In my first evaluations, I saw what was relevant to my life. I played fantasy games, so I saw dragons and griffins. I read science fiction all of my life almost exclusively, so I saw starships and galaxies. I studied science, so I saw cells and DNA. Guess what? According to respectable psychology, none of these things could possibly interest a woman. Only men should care about, and envision  such things. Women should only see domestic subjects, or matters relating to child care.

To say this angered me alone would be to ignore the vast disillusionment and disgust I felt. I resolved that no idiotic pseudo-science would determine my survival. I studied the same textbooks that my psychologist used.

My next evaluations uniformly portrayed me as the ideal of blessed womanhood. I saw butterflies and daffodils. I saw train tunnels and doughnut holes. I saw diapers and  teapots. And the most telling part is that my psychologist ate it up with a spoon.

Quote from: Elwood on September 06, 2008, 11:27:42 PM
You mean like this?



The first of the ten cards in the Rorschach inkblot test. It has been reported that popular responses include bat, badge and coat of arms. (^ Mons, W (1950). Principles and Practice Of the Rorschach Personality Test, 2nd, Faber, 31)

That looks like a robot with wings to me, or two wolves flying next to each other with an insect in the middle.

QuoteAnd then there is the classic Rorschach test that uses inkblots to assess a person's inner psychological experience. Several methods for administering and scoring the Rorschach have been developed, and although some of them are surrounded with a considerable amount of published research, it would be surprising if any two independent psychologists could administer the Rorschach to the same person and achieve identical findings.
http://www.guidetopsychology.com/testing.htm

Quote from: Lisbeth on September 07, 2008, 07:35:18 AM

QuoteAnd then there is the classic Rorschach test that uses inkblots to assess a person's inner psychological experience. Several methods for administering and scoring the Rorschach have been developed, and although some of them are surrounded with a considerable amount of published research, it would be surprising if any two independent psychologists could administer the Rorschach to the same person and achieve identical findings.
http://www.guidetopsychology.com/testing.htm

That is for the most part the meaning why I put the comic in my 1st post.
Hallucination jokes aside, the way the tests are subjectively interpreted through verbal and non-verbal input means even if the answer is "right" the patient could still be viewed as being "wrong".

Anyone who is wasting their time thinking about the inkblot instead of what the really hot therapy chick/dude would look like naked in their bed don't deserve to have imagination.  Really cool bonus, if you tell them this it pretty much stops the test, and who knows, you might get lucky.

True story, by the way.

Quote from: tekla on September 07, 2008, 12:57:03 PM
Anyone who is wasting their time thinking about the inkblot instead of what the really hot therapy chick/dude would look like naked in their bed don't deserve to have imagination.  Really cool bonus, if you tell them this it pretty much stops the test, and who knows, you might get lucky.

True story, by the way.

<NERD>
And all I could think of to say at 14 was, "I'm not taking this test. It's unscientific."

</NERD>

When I was 14 all I could think about was sex and money and what I could do to get sex and/or money.  Now that I'm way beyond 14 I think about other things like, well, um, ahh, well, I'll get back to you on that.

Besides, it's clearly Stitch from Lilo & Stitch.