Integrating the Rorschach and the MMPI in clinical assessment: conceptual and methodological issues

Response character styles in adolescents: a replication of convergent validity between the MMPI-A and the Rorschach

This study explored the extent to which similar or discordant response character styles (RCS) affected convergence between MMPI-A and Rorschach findings in a sample of 673 adolescents from a psychiatric inpatient setting. Meyer's (Meyer, 1997; Meyer, Riethmiller, Brooks, Benoit, & Handler, 2000) findings for adult samples were generally replicated in that adolescents showing similar RCS across both measures showed moderate to strong relationships between Rorschach and MMPI-A indicants of affective distress, psychosis, and interpersonal wariness, whereas those showing discordant RCS demonstrated negligible or negative correlations between these indicants. This pattern was evident for conceptually similar, but not conceptually unrelated variable pairs. Similarity and discordance of RCS was also found to have an impact on relationships with external criterion variables, including therapist ratings and discharge diagnoses. Moderated regression analysis supports the hypothesis that RCS moderates the strength of the relationship between Rorschach and MMPI-A. Implications for practice and future research are discussed.

Predicting DMS-IV cluster B personality disorder criteria from MMPI-2 and Rorschach data: a test of incremental validity

Despite their frequent conjoint clinical use, the incremental validity of Rorschach (Rorschach, 1921/1942) and MMPI (Hathaway & McKinley, 1943) data has not been adequately established, nor has any study to date explored the incremental validity of these tests for predicting Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed. [DSM-IV]; American Psychiatric Association, 1994) personality disorders (PDs). In a reanalysis of existing data, we used select Rorschach variables and the MMPI PD scales to predict DSM-IV antisocial, borderline, histrionic, and narcissistic PD criteria in a sample of treatment-seeking outpatients. The correlational findings revealed alimited relation between Rorschach and MMPI-2 (Butcher, Dahlstrom, Graham, Tellegen, & Kaemmer, 1989) variables, with only 5 of 30 correlations reaching significance (p <.05). Hierarchical regression analyses showed that both the MMPI and Rorschach data add incrementally in the prediction of DSM-IV borderline and narcissistic PD total criteria scores. The findings were less clear for the incremental value of Rorschach and MMPI-2 data in predicting the total number of DSM-IV histrionic PD criteria, which were best predicted by Rorschach data, and antisocial PD criteria, which were best predicted by MMPI-2 data. In addition to providing evidence of the incremental validity of Rorschach data, these findings also shed light on the psychological characteristics of the DSM-IV Cluster B PDs.

MMPI-Rorschach Interrelationships: Proposed Criteria for Evaluating Explanatory Models

An extensive empirical literature, spanning 50 years and 45 published investigations, leads to the conclusion that the Rorschach and the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) bear little or no meaningful relationship to each other. An inherent tension exists between these empirical findings and the widespread clinical practice of integrating MMPI and Rorschach results. At least three perspectives have been advanced concerning the relationship between these two instruments. One view holds that variables from the two measures will demonstrate significant patterns of convergence only in carefully designed research studies that involve specific, well-constructed and theoretically derived predictions. A second view postulates that although variables from the Rorschach and MMPI do not bear a high intercorrelation with each other, these variables may be combined to contribute significantly to the prediction of outcome variance. In this view, the combined use of the two instruments yields clinically useful increases in incremental validity not achievable by the use of either instrument in isolation. A third approach is reflected in the proposition that although the MMPI and Rorschach do not produce significant interrelationships under general conditions, meaningful relationships may be yielded under specific psychometric conditions, for example, under conditions in which the response styles are consistently displayed across those two instruments. This article will review research evidence related to each of these perspectives, with particular emphasis on the importance of clearly specifying the criteria to be applied in evaluating these models. The concepts of parsimony and heuristic value are proposed for these evaluation purposes.

Personality: individual differences and clinical assessment

Research in clinical personality assessment continues to be produced at a high rate. The MMPI/MMPI-2 remains the most popular instrument for both clinical application and psychopathology research. Two other clinical personality instruments, the Rorschach and TAT, continue to find a place in research and clinical assessment. Some new instruments have surfaced recently to deal with areas, such as personality disorders, that have been considered inadequately addressed. There is a growing recognition that the Five-Factor Model is too superficial for clinical assessment that requires more refined and broadened patient information. Clinical personality assessment has successfully survived a number of past challenges. The newest challenge stems from the health-care revolution, in which managed-care providers are reluctant to pay for assessment because of shrinking funds. Psychologists need to develop models for incorporating assessment information into the treatment process. The future is likely to see more extensive research and theoretical development in this endeavor.

Clinical Considerations in the Conjoint Use of the Rorschach and the MMPI

Contemporary clinical and research findings concerning the Rorschach and the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) indicate that (a) objectivity and subjectivity are relative and not categorical dimensions of these two instruments; (b) apparent contradictions between Rorschach and MMPI results are generative and not invalidating; (c) within limits, false negative findings are not cause for concern in the clinical application of Rorschach and MMPI variables; and (d) differences between the Rorschach and the MMPI in how they are structured and what they measure demonstrate considerable advantage in using them in complementary fashion to support clinical inferences.