德云社烧饼专场完整版:罗夏墨迹测试：习字本上的几滴墨水

罗夏墨迹测试

A few blots in the copybook

习字本上的几滴墨水

An old psychological test gets a revamp

对一个古老心理测试进行一次重整

Nov 12th 2011  

2011年11月12日    

IT SOUNDS like voodoo. But the Rorschach test, in which elements of someone’s personality can be deduced, its proponents claim, by his description of what he sees in a series of inkblots, has been used for 90 years, and is still going strong.

这听起来像跟伏都教有关。不过，罗夏墨迹测试--据它的支持者声称，在这个测试中，一个人的人格要素能从他对一系列的墨迹的描述中推断出来，已经被运用了90年，并将依旧盛行。

The original test was devised by Hermann Rorschach, a Swiss psychiatrist, in 1921. It involved someone (usually a psychologist or psychiatrist) asking someone else to look at ten inkblot images. In each case, the interlocutor inquires of the viewer, “What might this be?”, notes the response and attempts to draw conclusions.

这个独创性的测试是由一个瑞士的精神病学家，赫尔曼.罗夏(Hermann Rorschach)在1921年设计的。它要两个人参与，一个人（通常是心理学家或者精神病学家）要求另一个人看10幅墨迹图形。每一个个案中，询问者都会问观看者，“这可能是什么呢？”，然后记录他们的回答，并试图从中得出推论。

The question has always been, of course, how reliable the connection is between the response to the blots (generally, people, animals or objects) and the alleged diagnosis. Over the years, many experiments have been done to test the link. Now Gregory Meyer of the University of Toledo and his colleagues have reviewed the data. Their results, which form the basis of a new manual* on the topic, suggest the inkblot test does have real power. But Dr Meyer also rejects some of the traditional claims made on its behalf.

 

当然，问题永远都落在那些对墨迹的回答（一般说，人物，动物或者物体）和声称的诊断这两者之间的联系的可靠度上。在过去的这些年里，已有很多实验来测试这个联系。现在托莱多大学的格雷戈里.迈耶和他的同事已经披露了数据。他们的成果已成为一本相关主题的新教科书的基础，提出墨迹测试确是有效的。不过迈耶博士也摒弃了站在支持该测试的立场而做出的一些传统的断言。

Dr Meyer’s study is a review of 1,292 papers that report experimental attempts to link Rorschach responses with personality traits that have been established by other means. His main conclusion is that some of the ways the test has been used are, indeed, useless. He proposes, for example, axing the alleged connection between reporting mirrored images in a blot and the viewer’s level of egocentricity. He would also get rid of the idea that if a viewer focuses on the details of an image rather than the broader picture, then he is likely to have an obsessive personality. A third traditional interpretation that does not pass muster, in Dr Meyer’s view, is the suggestion that when a viewer sees things in a blot that the examiner thinks do not resemble the blot, that indicates impaired perception, which can lead to a diagnosis of psychosis. Dr Meyer would not get rid of this altogether. But he thinks the idea needs to be recalibrated.

迈耶博士的论文是一篇1292页的评论，该评论报告了那些试图将罗夏墨迹的回答和已用其他方式创建的人格特征联系起来的实验。他的主要结论是将这个测试用在某些方面确实是无效的。比如他建议把从墨迹中看出的图像和观看者的自私自利的程度之间的联系去掉。他还会摒弃这个观点即如果观察者将注意力放到一个图像的某些细节上而不是更宏观的整体图片上，这个人很可能有强迫性的人格。另一个在迈耶博士看来差强人意的传统解释是当者考察者认为一个观察者在一个墨迹上看出的东西不像那个墨迹那么就意味着感知障碍，这会导致诊断为精神错乱。迈耶博士不会彻底摒弃这一观点，但是他认为这个观点应该要重新校核。

Some Rorschach diagnoses do seem to stand up, though. People who report seeing representations of passivity or helplessness in the blots are thought to have a dependent personality, meaning they rely on others to satisfy their needs. Some of the studies Dr Meyer looked at did indeed find that people who produce such responses are more likely to request guidance in a classroom, ask an experimenter for help when solving puzzles, or hold on to a guide when they are blindfolded. And responses in which a viewer synthesises several elements in an inkblot to show how they are interrelated do seem to be correlated with intellect; such responses are found most often in people who also score highly on an unrelated psychological assessment, the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale.

但是有些罗夏测试的诊断确实似乎是站得住脚的。那些报告说在这些墨迹中看到表征消极性或无助性的图像的人被认为是具有依赖型人格，意思是他们依赖别人来满足他们的需求。迈耶博士做的一些研究确实发现作出此类回答的人在课堂上更倾向于要求指导，在解决难题的时候更倾向于向实验者求助，或者在被蒙上眼睛时更倾向于紧紧抓住引路人。还有，一个观察者综合了一个墨迹的几个要素并展示它们是如何相联系的回答确实似乎和智力相互关联。做出这类回答的人中的大部分都能在一项不相干的心理评估——韦氏智力测试中获得高分。

Dr Meyer disposes, too, of one perennial criticism of the Rorschach test—that it is culture-dependent. Studies in numerous countries come to broadly the same conclusions. A qualified thumbs-up, then, for inkblots. Perhaps the biggest threat to the test is that no one uses fountain pens any more, and so inkblots themselves have more or less become things of the past.

迈耶博士也处理了对罗夏测试的一个长期的批判——那就是文化依赖。在许多地区进行的研究大致上都得出了这些相同的结论。那这对墨迹测试来说就是一个高度的认可了。可能对于该测试最大的威胁是没有人再用自来水笔了，所以墨迹本身就或多或少变成了一种不复存在的东西。

*”Rorschach Performance Assessment System”, by Gregory Meyer, Donald Viglione, Joni Mihura, Robert Erard, Philip Erdberg and Fabiano Miguel. 

《罗夏测试应用评估体系》Gregory Meyer, Donald Viglione, Joni Mihura ,Robert Erard, Philip Erberg and Fabiano Miguel 著