Failure of Rorschach-comprehensive-system-based testimony to be admissible under the Daubert-Joiner-Kumho standard

William M. Grove, R. Christopher Barden, Howard N. Garb, Scott O. Lilienfeld

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

35 Scopus citations

Abstract

The Comprehensive System for the Rorschach (RCS) is currently the subject of intense scientific criticism. The normative data for many RCS scores are seriously in error and tend to make normal individuals appear maladjusted. Reliability is inadequate for many RCS scores, and validity for the great majority of RCS scores has not been adequately demonstrated. In addition, a substantial number of Rorschach Workshops studies, cited by B. Ritzier, R. Erard, and G. Pettigrevv (2002) as supportive of the RCS, are unavailable for examination. Finally, B. Ritzler et al. misinterpret central issues of the relevant legal analysis, including crucial legal standards. The RCS clearly fails to meet the standards for admissibility set forth in the Dauben, Joiner, and Kumho decisions.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)216-234
Number of pages19
JournalPsychology, Public Policy, and Law
Volume8
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 2002

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Failure of Rorschach-comprehensive-system-based testimony to be admissible under the Daubert-Joiner-Kumho standard'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this