The Validity of the Rorschach and the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory: Results from Meta-Analyses

Howard N. Garb, Colleen M. Florio, William M. Grove

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

54 Scopus citations

Abstract

Results from meta-analyses have been widely cited to defend the validity of the Rorschach. However, the meta-analyses have been flawed. For example, one meta-analysis included results that were obtained by calculating correlations but not results that were obtained by conducting t tests or analyses of variance. When we reanalyzed the data from the most widely cited meta-analysis (Parker, Hanson, & Hunsley, 1988), we found that for confirmatory studies (also called convergent-validity studies), the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) explained 23% to 30% of the variance, whereas the Rorschach explained only 8% to 13% of the variance. These results indicate that the Rorschach is not as valid as the MMPI.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)402-404
Number of pages3
JournalPsychological Science
Volume9
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 1998

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'The Validity of the Rorschach and the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory: Results from Meta-Analyses'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this