Psychopathy and the Rorschach: A Response to Wood et al. (2010)

Authors

Ted Bruce Cunliffe, Carlos Albizu University
Carl B. Gacono
Reid Meloy, University of California, San Diego; San Diego Psychoanalytic Institute
Jason M. Smith, Carlos Albizu University
Enna E. Taylor, Carlos Albizu University
David Landry, Carlos Albizu University

Abstract

PSYCHOPATHY AND THE RORSCHACH: A RESPONSE TO WOOD ET AL. (2010). Abstract Wood et al. (2010) published a meta-analysis in which the authors challenged the utility of the Rorschach Inkblot Test in delineating key differences between psychopathic and non-psychopathic individuals identified by the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R; Hare, 1991/2003). In this article, Gacono et al.’s (2001) five conceptual and four methodological criteria for the evaluation and interpretation of psychopathy/Rorschach literature were employed to provide a detailed review of the approach and procedure used by Wood et al. (2010). We identify and discuss a number of conceptual and methodological problems with the meta-analysis including confusion of the related but distinct terms of diagnosis and assessment, selection of studies, categorical versus dimensional interpretations of data, characterization of PCL-R and Rorschach findings, and meta-analytic methodology. Finally, recommendations for the essential components of well designed and implemented PCL-R and Rorschach studies are provided.

Recommended Citation

Cunliffe, Ted Bruce; Gacono, Carl B.; Meloy, Reid; Smith, Jason M.; Taylor, Enna E.; and Landry, David (2012) "Psychopathy and the Rorschach: A Response to Wood et al. (2010)," Archives of Assessment Psychology: Vol. 2, Article 5.
Available at: https://nsuworks.nova.edu/psyassessment/vol2/iss1/5