Whither the Rorschach? An analysis of the evidence

John Hunsley*, J. Michael Bailey

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

12 Scopus citations


In the previous Special Section, the authors presented empirical evidence and logical analysis that were sufficient to demonstrate that the widespread use of the Rorschach in clinical, legal, forensic, and occupational settings is unwarranted on both scientific and ethical grounds (J. Hunsley & J. M. Bailey, 1999). To expand on their analysis and to respond to issues raised in the previous and current Special Sections, they begin their article by examining a number of conceptual issues that are at the heart of the disagreements about the Rorschach. The focus is then shifted to the central issue of clinical utility, with an emphasis on why current research is insufficient to demonstrate the utility of the Rorschach. Next, the psychometric issues raised by Weiner (2001) are addressed and an alternative perspective on the psychometric viability of the Rorschach is provided. Finally, the authors conclude with some suggestions for future directions that must be taken in research to address the substantive concerns raised by Rorschach critics.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)472-485
Number of pages14
JournalPsychological assessment
Issue number4
StatePublished - 2001

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Psychology
  • Psychiatry and Mental health


Dive into the research topics of 'Whither the Rorschach? An analysis of the evidence'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this