Psychology
Essay on Dr. Heilman’s revealing
Just recently a Canadian psychologist Dr. James Heilman have published the trade secrets of one of the widely used psychoanalytic test called the Rorschach test or popularly the inkblot test developed by Hermann Rorschach in 1921 (Reilly, Peter Psy.D. January 8, 2007). The use of the inkblot test is to test the subject’s perception of what they see the inkblots to be and in return the responses are to be evaluated by means of complex algorithm and psychological interpretation. These responses have to be obtained impromptu and the subjects should not have prompt knowledge of what the inkblot test is all about and the secrets behind it, otherwise the responses would be deemed meaningless. The subject who is not amenable to be tested would have the outrageous idea to get away with the test and fool the psychiatrist of his mind’s real condition by answering the right responses. As a psychologist and member of a professional society it is unethical to reveal such sensitive information. Upon receiving the license to become a psychologist he evidently took oath to protect the doctrines of his chosen profession and that includes divulging information pertaining to procedures and methodologies. The effectiveness of the inkblot test was clearly compromised and its integrity will simply be shattered by challenges questioning its credibility (White, Patrick July 31, 2009). Exposures of certain anomalies in the process could be a lot reasonable and can easily justified, but the fact that the exposing a well kept secret of a clinical process is just simply crossing out of line. In the past the inkblot plates are commonly seen published on several websites but not to the extent that their definitions, ratio of correct responses and attributes were published until Dr. Heilman had it revealed on Wikipedia (Cohen, Noam July 28, 2009). Dr. Heilman’s course of action is a violation of professional ethics stipulated in every profession’s handbook. It poses danger not only to the subject being tested but the psychology practitioners as well. The information about the inkblot test could be dangerous when it caught attention by someone curious. Anyone who would have an interest to memorize the plates and their correct responses would develop the confidence and courage that they can withstand to challenge the test when they encountered it. Any attempts by a psychologist to determine the state of mind of the subject would be difficult when the subject already knows what the answer to the question would be just before he sees it. Being said that, psychotherapy would also suffer a great loss from having their trade secrets revealed their efforts to defend or conclude analysis of a subject would seem to be suspicious. This will also lead to reduced integrity to the part of the part of psychology professionals. The inkblot test has been around for a long time and still actively being used in practice until today. But the information about the inkblot test being revealed outside of the confines of psychology practices makes the practitioners less trustworthy of their insights on the matters of analyzing a person’s mind if their methodology is in question. Although analyzing results of inkblot test does not only depend on the subject’s responses because there are other variable that has to be considered in order to come up with a projection, it is still detrimental to the overall outcome of the test that is why it would be meaningless. Dr. Heilman also concluded the inkblot test as useless; on the contrary the Rorschach test has been around since its conception and is still actively being used. That in fact suggests a strong reliance to the process that 20% of psychologists based on correctional facilities uses it while 36% of forensic psychologist and 124 out of 161 clinical psychologists uses it all the time (James, Emma. August 14, 2009). The figures render evidence how inkblot test bring about positive results on their analysis that aids psychologists to make a fair judgment on their findings. In fact inkblot test is a complex process that only requires vast knowledge on personality dynamics and proficiency of its method takes months for an administrator to learn and years for interpreter to master. The measured value rendered by inkblot test regarding thought disorder on subjects with schizophrenia is actually widely accepted (Liddle, Peter F. MRCPsych, Ngan, Elton T.C. MD, et al October 11, 1992). The usefulness of the test can only be challenged depending on the amount of insightfulness, empathy and sensitivity of the tester. Being said that, there is nothing questionable about the process and its failure only depends upon the competency of the person administering it. As for Dr. Heilman’s claims that the inkblot test is useless, there is no definite justification to establish such claim because a moratorium was issued in 1999 regarding the use of it (Liddle, Peter F. MRCPsych, Ngan, Elton T.C. MD, et al October 11, 1992); furthermore enough evidence has been presented to justify that inkblot test is an effective tool to measure thought disorder.
Reilly, Peter Psy.D. (January 8, 2007) Rorschach Inkblot Test Web Retrieved April 4, 20012 from http://www.rorschachinkblottest.com/
White, Patrick. (July 31, 2009) Rorschach and Wikipedia: The battle of the inkblots Web Retrieved April 4, 20012 from http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/rorschach-and-wikipedia-the-battle-of-the-inkblots/article1235586/
Cohen, Noam. (July 28, 2009) A Rorschach Cheat Sheet on Wikipedia Web Retrieved April 4, 20012 from http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/29/technology/internet/29inkblot.html?_r=2
James, Emma. (August 14, 2009) Articles: Dueling Doctors and the Rorschach Inkblot Test Web Retrieved April 4, 20012 from http://www.ecademy.com/node.php?id=133167
Liddle, Peter F. MRCPsych, Ngan, Elton T.C. MD, Caissie, Stephanie L. MA, Anderson, Cameron M. B.A. and Bates, Alan T. B.A. (October 11, 1992) Thought and Language Index: an instrument for assessing thought and language in schizophrenia Web Retrieved April 4, 20012 from http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/181/4/326.full
