Rorschach and Wikipedia: The battle of the inkblots

www.theglobeandmail.com...

In mid-June, the physician and Wikipedia editor posted 10 Rorschach inkblots and the most common interpretations of them at the online encyclopedia, a move that has plunged him into an intense, and at times personal, debate with psychologists who want the 86-year-old evaluation method kept from the public eye.


-snip-

The association's policy states that tests constitute a “trade secret” and should be withheld from the public to prevent “significant negative impact on the health of Canadians.”

The test might be a trade secret, but the copyright protection expired long ago. Even so, a German publishing company that sells licenses to the Rorschach images is considering legal action against Wikipedia.

Well, what is THIS tempest blowing around the ivied halls of psychology? So the laymans interpretation of pareidolia may be dangerous?

Hunting Dr. Lillienfeld's Wiki entry is my next project, (IF it's still up).

Here it is...

Verrrry interesting!

Related:

www.nytimes.com...



[edit on 29/7/09 by masqua]

reply to post by masqua
I quit a Psych BSc in the 2nd year for a different Degree and recall the Rorschach tests were presented as historical. IIRC they were no longer used by the BPS. The criticisms of the article appear moot in this light.

I found the commonest descriptions of the inkblots (at the foot of the wiki) fascinating. At first glance they do indeed look just like what the consensus described. What would be amusing would be to read some of the more 'out there' interpretations followed by the case file of the patient Imagine Al Capone, Hitler, Manson, Ted Bundy..."I see my mother crying...blood...skin..sob...sob..."

Here's one of the 'inkblots'....out of copyright after all. I won't spoil it by writing what the commonest interpretation was...read the OP links!

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/9ee17208b3df.jpg[/atsimg]

reply to post by Kandinsky


Two African bush women caryring a basket and stopping to look at the butterfly that flew between them. Oh .. too much detail? Okay .... I say two humans.

I looked at the other inkblots. I saw a lot of bats. Wonder what that means.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Wonder what that means.

Oh, gees, FF... don't ask yourself. It could be dangerous to your health.

There's an issue here, not sure what it is yet, but it's important. Why is pareidolia so contentious? How could seeing The Hoff in a taco be a thread to our sanity.

These questions need to be answered?

On the inkblot supplied by Kandinsky, I see two high-heeled Las Vegas dancers trying to bag a black one-eyed pumpkin.

I have my psychology degree and we just barely passed through these inkblots. We didn't go into them much at all. I don't understand what the big uproar is. Hardly anyone is going to go and see the 'answers' and they aren't used as much as people think.

Originally posted by masqua
I see two high-heeled Las Vegas dancers trying to bag a black one-eyed pumpkin.

Topless dancers or clothed?
I saw topless bush ladies in Africa ....

(and before anyone says that's normal for a guy to see naked women ... I'm a girl and I'm definately 'straight' )