Western Michigan University Western Michigan University

ScholarWorks at WMU ScholarWorks at WMU

Master's Theses Graduate College

8-1963

Anatomical Associations on the Rorschach Test as a Predictor of Anatomical Associations on the Rorschach Test as a Predictor of

Assaultive Behavior Assaultive Behavior

Keith O. Schmidt

Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/masters_theses

Part of the Clinical Psychology Commons

Recommended Citation Recommended Citation Schmidt, Keith O., "Anatomical Associations on the Rorschach Test as a Predictor of Assaultive Behavior" (1963). Master's Theses. 3594. https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/masters_theses/3594

This Masters Thesis-Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate College at ScholarWorks at WMU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Theses by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at WMU. For more information, please contact wmu-scholarworks@wmich.edu.

NATOMlCAL ASSOClATlONS ON THE RORSCHACH TEST A A PREDICTOR OF A SAULTlVE BEHAVIOR

by

Keith O. Schmidt

A th ale pr e nt d to th Faculty of th School of OX' duat

Studi • in partial fulfillment of the

I'l gr e of Maater ot Art,

Western Michigan Univ reity Kalamazoo. Micbi an

Au et 1963

.•. Jf

ACKNOW LEI'GMENTS

Cirateful acknowledgment i8 extend d t my c:ommitt e chair­

man, Cr. M. H. Robertaon. Hie objective evaluation, continued

encour aaement, and genoroua donation of tim wer t>ae ntial in the

completion of tbie theaia. 1 wiah to thank r-r. C. Koronakoe, and

.Cr. E. J. Asher for th ir willingnes1 to serve on my committee.

Without their •uggeation1 and a.bl a• ietance thia proj ct uld

not have been po1uible.

Decpeet ppreciation ia extended to Ro er O. Olive, H ad of

Psychological Service• at the Ionia State Hospital, for sharing hie

clinical experience, offering criticiem1, d tactfully manaaing

the many adminhtrative problems. Thzoughout hl1 ben volent

paternalbm has served a■ an invaluable encouragement to complet

thia etudy as well ae motivation for future ndeavora. In ddition,

I am grateful to my colleaguee, O. O. GrUfin, and H. K. rWard

for their coupling of candid comment• with coo.1eniality that aided

at variou• eta.gee o1 thi9 project. A note of thank• muet be made

to P. C. Willoughby who• •ympathetic e ha• tol rated the

inconveniences auffered by being in the dual role of peraonal

fri nd and colleague.

Thank• ii extended to rr. s. J. B ck of the Psychology

repartment at the University of Chicaao for both affording m the

opportunity to us his data and make valuable eugg(;'..stions. The

author also wishea to thank personnel of the lnetitut for Psycho•

somatic and Psychiatric Reaeuch and Training at the Michael

Reeet: H.01pital for their interest and coopt11ration when gathering

the normative data.

Appreciation is extended to C. L. Pom roy for hi1 ten city

and ex cting use of clerical 1kiUa when typing the many di-aft• of

thh thesis.

Keith 0. chmidt

Introduction

Method .

Reaults

Piecue1ion

Summary

Refer ncee

. .

• •

• .

• •

. .

• •

•

•

.

•

TABLE OF CONTENTS

. . . . . . . . . . .

• • • • • • . • • • . • . . • .

. . . . • . • .

. • • • • • • • • • . . • • • .

. . . • • • . . • • • • • • • .

• • . • . • • . • • . • • • • •

•

•

•

•

. . . .

. . .

• . .

• • . .

• • • .

• • • .

Page

l

12

17

zo

22

INTRO UCTION

Of special concern to society ia the prediction of aaaaultive

behavior. In r spona to thia concern. p•ycholo y along with the

oiaciplinee of eociology and c:riminololfY have �ried te> devise

measures that would id ntify the potentially aeaaultiv individual.

For the mo•t part, paycholo ieta have centered their {fort• on

clinical judgmenta bas d on interview• and t•ei.t d ta. Altheugh no

one paycbological test baa boea found to h ve a clear euperiorlty

over all other teatt, clinical peycbologbte generally favor projec­

tive techniqu •· Judging from the frequency of clinical u• g and

the quantity of reeearch. the Rorechach Test would • em to hold

some promiae ae a predictor of aaaaultive bavior.

A revi w of the Rorach ch literature show• an increased

emphaeie on content in contr at to formal coring. For xample,

Elbur (19S9), Goldfarb (1945), Gorlow (1952), Lindner (1943),

Muratein (1956), Rapaport (1946), h ve •us e■ted that reaponee

content which ha• hoetile or destructive connotati011e ie r lated to

aggr seive feelings within th individual. Formal scoring eat gorice

have been ueed, but only with 1Ught eucc ••• Finney (1951) showed

apparent succeas u in& form acoring c:ategorie■• An aeaaultive

group showed significantly more color minu• (FC-, CF•) reeponaee

l

than a nona.a aultive group. Howevt-:r, wh n Finney ( 19 55}

replicated the study, he found that ev<�r l of the formal scor, s

which w re significant in the ori in l study were not significant.

Anot er investigator foun that an aeaaultiv group did not product'

significantly mor white-apace, C , an.cl C re■ponsea than uon­

asaaultiv roup (Kane, 1955). Sommer Ir. Sommer (1951) could

distinguish between aaaaultive and non.a• aultiv patient on the

ba is of co1or and mov m nt r .. ·aponsee only when content waa added

to the formal acorea. Att mpte hav b en m de to m aaure gr •·

aion in tcrma of the white- pace r epo,ue. For sample, ht.gram

( 19 54) report d that aubjecta plac d in aggreaai.on produein

situations eliclte more whit -apace r eponaea than those xamin d

in nonaggressive aituationa.

Tbreo kind.a of devi t population• hav been used in the study

of a•aaultiveneaa: priaonera, peycbiatric pati nte, and thoee

undergoing some form of psychotherapy. Kan ( 1955) used a hoatil­

ity content scale in the study of as aultive and nonaa■aultive mal

prison rs. He assumed that fan •Y would provid an outlet for

hostility, thua making it unn c • ary lor a per eon to act out his

gre aive impula •• Conaequ ntly, he hypotbeaiaed that a■aaultive

inmates would ahow 1 •• Roracb ch hostility content than nonaaeaul­

tiv inmates. The results were in the opposite dir ction. The

2

asaultive group ecored significantly high r on the R.oracha.ch

ho•tility content scale than th nona■•aultive group. By a eimilar

ecoring method, Sjostedt (19 S) wae abl to differentiate b twe

asa ultive d nonaseaultlve femal prbonera.

ment of the Probl m

Some Rorschach workers have ob• rv d that ao. tomy reaponeee

appear with reat r than avera.a fr quency in the R.orechach pro­

tocols of individual• who hav been asaaultlve. The content of our

c:ultur assista in t is rationale. Daily, it symbolically portray•

death, danger, and deetru.ction with the eign of th ekull and croea­

bonea. The ambiguoue stimuli of the llorachac:h allow culture-bound

individual to expre •• unknowingly. their a greaaive wla es. Couee-

queutly, anatomy response• may b means to r produc what

society d monstrat • in th •kull and croeebonea. The purpoee of

this etuc:ly ie to examin the validity of that ob• rvation. It is hoped

that the finding• of thia research may be of aome valu in predicting

as eaultiv behavior.

Hermann Rorschach (1942) in hia oriainal work treated an­

atomical a• ociationa a• an important ind pendent factor. H

ob1erv�d th t an tomy reaponeea aom times r placed the moi­

usual animal percept•. He r aeone . that tht• increaae in anatomy

association• reflected an attompt to comp naate for fcelinaa of

intellectual inadequacy.

3

Cautiously, Klopfer (1954, p. 384) indicatee that anatomical

association• may be " ..• an attempt to deal with feelings about

one1elf ao ae to impress oth r• with technical knowledge." He.

further states that the kind and quality of the response, as well ae

the determinants, have to be considered.

Piotrowski ( 1957, p. 34-9) ie in general agreement with other

r<:s�archers. He suggest• that producing anatomy responses 11 • • •

may very well be an attempt at convincing other•• and oneaelf, that

one's intellect ie quite active, daring, and adequ te. "

The interpretive significance of anatomy reepon•e• auggeated

by Rav (1951 1 p. 440) is not in agreement with the previouely men­

tioned inveatigatore. He thinks that anatomical aeaociations "· ••

require a minimum of intellectual strain. '' He belicvea th t the

minimum effort involved in giving anatomical associations indicates

either restriction of ability or a restriction of affectivity. In

concluding his clinical logic, be offer• the suggestion that this

restriction " ••• might be with the ability epher -feeblemind dneea0

or in the affective sphere-anxiety. "

Beck ( 1963) auggesta possible artifacts in interpreting anatomy

content. The subject's vocation may result in mere memory repro­

duction• with little dynamic significance. In others, they are "· •.

foci of ego valuea; prestige ideaa, similar to name dropping. Or

4

the topic is an anchor of. security, as I have found in many medical

students." Howev.-:r, he does offer a generaliz.ation regarding the

significance of anatomy r sponses. It h that "·.. atomy content

is a m2chani 01 fo1· binding clinical anxi ty, usually of a deeply set

ego•threat<.:ning variety. 1 h �e se n this in enough p tient■ of a

variety of clinical pictur�s to make the enerallzation with

conficlenc ,:, • 11

The findings by agner (1961) add lmpetua to Beck'• eneral•

ization. With a group of colle c student,, h found that anxiety. a•

measured by the !PAT ecale, waa reflected in an interaction twef'n

a gressive movement rceponees and anatomy re1pons on th

Rorschach Test. Goldstein (1954) found a aignificant positive rel •

tionship between scor on the Taylor Manif et Anxiety Scale and

scores on Ellzur' Teet of ho tility baeed on Rorach ch content.

Phillips It Smith (1953, p. 123) state the followin·:

"Anatomy content reflect• senaitlvity to, and concern with, the e,cpr ••ion of deatructive impuleea. Paradox• ieally. those individuals who act out their eetructive impul • do not develop anatomy content; the records 0£ an as aultive group art, conapicuoaely d voi of anatomy re•poneea. 11

Usina thte frame of referenc • olf (1,57) compar d a aroup of

patients who have hi torh•• of acting out with a roup classified aa

11non-actors 11 , and foW'ld that an tomy re•pon•e• w r a aignillcant

factor only when hoetile drive 1 vel, a• derived from Rorschach

5

content, was taken into consideration. This author argue• that with

more aclequate controls and more precision in defining an aeeaultive

group, it is possible that an aaeaultive group will produce mor�

anatomy reepon•e• than a nona••aultive group. Phillip• "- Smith

beliove that the rea•on subjects producing anatomy reepon•es will

not act out their deatructive wiahee ie relatec1 to the fact that ''fear

of bodily harm'' is associated with all anatomy cont nt. Thue, tbia

fear of bodily harm is a contraindic tion to acting out a.ggresaion.

However, this author reason• to a different conclusion. He

bdievea that the fear of bodily harm is synonymous to the binding

clinical anxiety suggested by Beck. In some cases, the acute anxi­

ety is reflected by the inordinate number of anatomical a sociations.

The inner turmoil bring• the doatruetive wiehes to the surface and

overtaxes e o defenses. Consequently, in an attempt to alleviat

this anxiety the individual strike• out against hie environment.

Hypothesca

Clinically, this investigator and his colleague• have obeerved

that anatomical associations ar ... Hcited with greater than average

exp ctancy among asaaultive patients. Howev .r, it wae believed

that this observation should b subjected to scientific validation.

Thus, the following hypothesea have been formulated to determine

the possibility of differentiating an as aultive group from a

6

nonassaultive group on the baais of anatomical aeaociationa pro•

duct·d on the Rorechach Test.

The hypotheses are:

1. The •wn of an tomy reeponaes on the RorachachTest will be signUicantly reater for a i,.ychoticaseaultive group than for a psychotic nonae aultiv group. aexu. ly deviat group, and a grou.p of norn1.ala.

2. Neither a psychotic nonaaa ultlv group nor asexually deviate group will diff r eipificantlyfrom a group of normals in the num r of anatomyrcaponeea produced on the Rorschach Teet.

1

'lETHOt·

Lasc.mtially, the experimental design tot •at the hypoth aes

involve the matching of three clinical group with a rou.p of nor ..

ma.la. and then det rmining the cliff el' t::nc,; among thcee roupa in

the number of anatomy reeponaes elicited on the Rorschach Teet.

Tho clinical groups were matched with a group of normal for eex,

age. nu.m.ber of responeea, crucation, and occupation. In addition,

all those individuals with a full ecale W echeler IQ of leas than 70

wer\. eliminated from the etu y.

Subjects

Protocols of malee who are, or Who have been, patient• at

the Ionia State Ho•pital were uaed In acb clinical g.roup. Each

group contained 3Z protoeola. The criteria for tht! eelecnon of

subjects lnto their respective groupings follow:

Assaultive psychotic group:

l. Legally, their deviant behavior baa warrant dthe ctiarcC:.1 of either felonious assault. assau.ltwith intent to do gr eat bodily harm, or varyingdegree• of mui-der.

l. The:. patient was !ni i Uy com uitt�d a. a. mentallyill pe:reon.

Sexually deviated group:

1. Thee eubject wert" committed u 11<:JCUal eviatea

under Public Law 165 ( 1951).

Z. Those patients with tht� charge of rape. or attemptedrape were excluded. These charges are omitted toprevent any overla.pping of xp rimental groups.

Nonaseau!tivc psychotic group:

1. No previous aeeaultive act8 were Uated on theF. B. 1. report.

z. Their crimes wert a ainst prop rty.

3. The patient was initially committed a.a a mentallyill person.

The norma t.iv group:

1. These subjects were obtain d frorr1 B ck'a publishednorms (1950) that are on file at th Michael ReeseHospital in Chicago. The data were obtain d on 68male norm ls. True eel ction of the 32 normal pro­tocol• used in the atu.dy will be di8cuaeed in detailwhen diecuaaing the matching procedure•.

Matching Procedure

.Alphabetically. the patient population, an thoae on conval s­

cent statue, were scr en d to meet the r apectiv erit rla stated

bove. The nonaesaultive psychotic oup wa the first to be s -

lected bccaune the hoepital population contain d th fewest of this

type of cast'!. The first step was to obtain orachach record from

paticot.s who fulfilled the crittria. Tho next •tep was to consult

Beck's norms to locate a comparable individual rt.?ga:rding ex, agE:,

number of rd,ponses, education, and occupational statue. ln the

•:vent the normative group containccl no uitable individual for

9

matching, the patient wa.a not used in the study. U a suitable indi­

vidual waa located in the norm tlve group, all but the anatomy

response• were recorded. Thirty-two nonaaeaultlve subj cts were

compared to thirty•two of Beck's normative group. The psychotic

a saultiv� group was the next to be selected. After meetins their

criteria for selection, thirty-two subject■ of this group were

match�d to the other two roup•. Finally, the • JNally deviate

group was selected on the baaie of their criteria and matched with

the other three groups.

Matching .t'ata

Ta.bl� 1 eummarbt:s the matching dat for the clinical groups

and the normative group. The group mean for each individu 1

matching variable is pres nted.

Group

Bt:ck 's normative group

Assaultive psy• chotic group

Nonaeaaultive

psychotic group

Sexually deviate

group

T BLE 1

Matching I ata !or all Groups

Ase R<.;se?'!aea Occupation

30.81 ZS. 53 2.47

31.69 Z6.09 2.75

29.0;) 26.28 2.75

32.28 27.25 2.73

Education

10.34

11. 03

9.91

10.72

10

Tht� occupational classifications were identical to those uaed

by Beck in his normative etudy (1950). The classification• are a1

followe: Group 1. Ex cutivea; Group 11, Skilled; Oroup Ul, Semi­

skilled; and Croup IV, Unekill�c.1. Wh n queationable clusificationa

occurred. the examples lbted in the original •tudy were uae in

n1a.king the rlsciaion.

Scoring

Examiners adminieterin tht� Rorachach Teat scor�d their

protocols by the Beck scoring sy•tcm. The author further sub­

divided the anatomy r�•ponace into bony, viscera!. and x-ray cla•­

aifications. The bony anatomy aroup included refcrenc to any one

in the body, o. g., hip hon•�, pelvic r<.: ion, or skeleton. Th via•

c, ra1 anatomy group contain�d any internal organs, e.g., lungs,

heut, and guts. ,,.,,_ bone with fle:ah attached, or elaborations men­

tioning inner portions of the body, was plact:"d in this claeeification.

The x•ray category included any association in which x-ray is men­

tioned. A response; •uch as an "x-ray of a skel ton" or "x-ray of a

heartn rt-mains in thi• category. Problem• of questionable original

scorings and marginally legible writln1 w�rc resolved by diacWJ•ion

with a more experienced Rorschach worker.

11

RESULTS

The hypothe is that the sum of anatomy reapon•es fo:r the

assaultive psyehotic group would be significantly larger than for the

other clinical groupa was not suppoi-tcd. However, a• hypotbeaiscd,

no significant differences were found when comparing the •exually

deviate and nonaaaaultive psychotic groups with the noi-mative group.

The median test was used to determine U statietically ignif­

icant diff rences were obtained. Thia atatiatic, although not ideally

uiteci to this deeign, wa• the method of etati•tical analysis thought

to be the most feasible. The predictor variable, anatomy re. ponees,

is not normally diatributed and viol tea one of the e•sential eaump­

tious necessary for the use of parametric methods. Consequently,

thi• precluded the uae of any parametric tecbniqu a and neceesi­

tated the use of nonparameuic methoda. Many of th nonparametric

technique• t'ecommended for rdated group• were not applicable,

c. g., dat have to be x-anked. randomb d, or differences meas­

ured. Fully cognizant that the use of the median te•t i intended for

indcp<'n<1ent samples, the author decided th it wa.a the inoat appro­

priate t('Chnique. This test is very powe1:ful when uacd with related

samples, and consequently, rigorous teet of the author•• hypoth-

12

T bl 2 su marizca the result d riv d from the compari on

of experimental group with the normative group.

TABLE 2

Group df xZ P. ) . 05 = 3. 84

Psychotic as eaultiv group 1 .97

P9ychotic non a aultivc "'l'OUp \ l. 00

St"xually acvi te group l • 06

Further analy•i• w e mad to determine it any of th experi­

mental groupa, namely, the psychotic aaaaultive, p•yc:hotic non•

aesaultive, and the • xually d viate if.fer aignilicantly from ach

oth •r. No eignificant diff r •nc • were found. T ble 3 pr e �nt the

etatiatical results obtained by the compariaone.

TABLL 3

Comparison of Anatomy Roae2n•t1• or the Paychotlc Aesaultive, P•ychotic Nona&eaultive

1 an

Sexu Uy P<::viah' Group, with • ch Other

Group Compar iaons df P. > . 05 = 3. 84

Assaultive v nonaaeaultiv roupe 1 • 02 .....

A saaultivic va. Sex Deviat grot,ps l • 00Nona•eaultive v • Sex I'evlate groups 1 • 02

13

The data werE- plotted to determine if any significant differ­

ences were concealed by the stringency ot the et tietical test. In

a.ddition. it was hoped that: a n-iore appropriate point to dichotomize

the data might become visible. The fr quency cur,,e1 for clinical

group and for the norn1al group ahowecl no i!ldication of eiplficant

clif.forences. Figure 1 preaents the r<.•Nlte obt iued by plotting how

many times a r�articula-r total of !matomy reepons II appeared for

each group.

14

)

J

')

J

.... .

-

j

;I -) ,.

l )

y 1 ,

15-

14

. 1'3

12,

11

10

9

8

- 7 .

b

4

3

2.

1

f'lG. 1 COMPARISON OF t ANATOMY RESPONSES

., ' .. �

, r

FOR EAC� GROUP

---•-�•-- ; BECKS )IORUATIVE GROii?

--/s---t:r- ·psyCHOTIC ASSAIILrlVE Gl?OIIP

---o--o-PSYC/IOTIC NONASSAULTIV£. GROUP

---·---i•--· SEXUALLY DEVIATE:. .. GROUP .

. l

o 2 3 + 5 '° 7 e 9

ANATOMY RESPONSES

l'h\ll su.bgrollpings of anatomy were not preeented becau.ae of

lack of signU'.icance- found with th$ eum of anatomy, Furthfirmore.

the number c,f aubjecta in each 3rwp giving reeponsee in a parti.CU•

lar anatomy subgrouping was too small for meaningful analyeu.

16

fllSCUSSION

The clinic obaervation that anatomical a•eociatlona appear

more frequently in an assaultive group waa not eupported by thb

reaearch. lt ia poaeible that over a period of time the recor •

containin aeveral anatomy reepon•e• may have unduly intlu need

the observers. In other worda, observation• were bia•ed by selec­

tive recall of past clinical experience.

Th finding• highlight the methodological problem• in con•

ducting research on a single variable of a multivariant in■trument.

The use of anatomical asaociaticma as the predictor variable re­

flected the weakness 0£ overgeneralization. Anatomy r eponeo1 can

not be given a ain le global meaning. The exact interpretation of

anatomy reapon.aee b still an open queetioo. Rorschach worker

should take heed and re-evaluate th ir generalized interpretation•,

e.g., aggreeaive ura a, underlyin1 peycho•ia, severity of peycho­

pathology and eeaultive tende11cie • the multivari t nature of the

Rorech ch makes it necee■ary to scrutinize each reaponae and con ..

idcr it in relation to other vartabl ••

Th<.• clinical group• u■ea in thb study were acce■albl to th

author bec.au•e ot hi employment at the Ionia State Hoepitai. lt ie

the author'• contention that there is over J.appina of tho psychotic

17

populations used in thin research and that of a prison population.

The similarity does not become appa.r<;."flt until one conai er s the

patient population mo:rtJ c:loaely. All patient• have come into con­

flict with tho law aa a re ult of their anti ocial behavior. Since

the r behavior has been of an nntieocial nature, leg disposition

of th - case must be made. The mo•t frequent •olution is a p.l'laon

sentence. However, in an effort to avoid the sentence, aome

intlividual1 eek com1nitment to the hoapital a• a mentally ill per son.

A lack of uniformity in th interpr tatton of peychoah. a society

aeking for puni•hment for their illegal acta, and the pro■ecutor'•

wish to diapose of the cue, all aid to eventuate commitment to the

Ionia State Hoepital. Thus, it is felt that similar reeulte would be

obtained when using a prison population.

The interaction of ego defense• and dl'lve■ produces a unique

human personality too complex to diff rentiate an u•aultive from

a nonassaultive group almply by anatomy cont nt. However• the

reaulte do suggest areu for future lnveatlgation. A pos•ible fruit­

ful investigation would attempt to determine the personalized mean•

in the subject has projectE:d by Heiting anatomical a■aoci tiona to

the R.orachach T et figuree. To ecomplieh thi•• each aubject'•

social history would have to be inveatig ted.

For future reeearch, effort. to determine the per nalhs d

18

meaning of anatomy re spouses may be fertile exp(�rimental ground.

The possible investigation of th anxiety cwpled with iuiatomy res­

ponses is another. Such investigation would be a cont:dbution to the

etudy •Of ego defenee mechanisms and the under etanding of personality

19

SUMMARY

The objective of this experiment wa• to determine th poaai­

bility ol predicting assaultive b\;havior by using anatomy response•

produced on the Rorechach T at. It was bypotbeah:ed that paychotic

assaultive aubjeets would produce more anatomical a•aociation•

than a paychotic nonaaeaultive. a sexually deviat , and a normal

group.

Three groupe of Rorschach protocol• from male pati nte at

the Ionia State Hoapital were used. The three groupe were u

follow: psychotic assaultive, paychotic nonaaaaultive, and sex­

ually deviate. Each group contained thirty-two aubjecta who w re

matched with eubjecta from Beck's normative sample. All groups

were matched for aex, education, occupation, age, and number of

response••

No significant differences were obtained and the hypoth aie

was not supported. The clinical observation initiating thia study

was thought to be bia•od by a selec::tiv recall of recorde containing

many anatomical a• soc::iationa.

The author examined three methodological pointe related to

hie experimental design. One, overgeneraliz tlotH are made re­

garding anatomical aeaociationa. Two, R.orachach variable must

20

be ecrutinized and considered in relation to other variables. And

third, personality ia too complex a enom non to diffeT,�otiate an

aae ultive gi-oup from a nonaa•a.ultiv roup solely on the baais of

anatomy r�eponses,

Furthe.,: xploration into tb relationship b tween anxiety and

anatomical aaeoc:1 tion■ may abed Ught on the u•c ol defenae mech­

ani ms and how they mana; to keep aeeaultive wieh • under control.

Such investigation would not only contribute to the atudy of project­

ive techniquee, but al■o aid in the underatanding of personality

dynamics.

21

REFERENC.E.S

Beck, S. J., B c:k, A. G., Levitt, £. E. & Moli•h, H. •

Rorschach'• Teat I. New York: Grune & Str tton, 1961

B('d., S. J. • Rabin, A. 1. • Tbiee n, W, O., Molhh, H. B., &t

Thet!ord, W. H. The normal pereonality a.• project din

the Rorschach Te•t. l.: P•rehol. 1950, 15!, z41 ... a97.

B ,cit, S. J. Pereonal communication. May 6, 1963.

Eliaur, A. Content analyaia of the Ror■cha.ch with r gard to

anxiety an hoetility. Rorech. !_!. Exch., 1949. !!, 247-Z84.

Finney, B. C. Rorschach teat correlate• of aesaultive behavior.

l.:_ proj. �• 1953, !_1 3'49-360.

Finney, B. C. Rorechach co :relat a of •• ultive behavior.

l..: � Tech. 1955. !2_, 6-19.

Ciolof b, W. The anim l aymbol in the Rorechach t et, and an

animal saociation t� t. Rorach. �- Ex.ch •• 1945, 9, 8-15.

Oooc•tein, L. lnterrelatton.ebipe amon sever 1 measure• of

anxiety d hostility. l.: coneult. Paychol •• 1954, _!!, 35-39.

Gor low, L. , Zimet. P. • Fine, R. , The validity of anxl ty anc:1

hoetiUty Rol'echach content ecore• amon adolescents.

I: consult. Ps:rchol. l9SZ. 16, 73-75.

22

Ingram, W. Prediction of aggr,:ssion from th� Rorschach.

J. con ult. Psychol. 19 54, 13, 23-28.

� an • P. Av Uability of Hostile Fant sy Related to Over

Behavior. Unpubliahed doctor I a dieaertation, Univ�r 1ity

of Chica.go, 1955.

Klopfer, B •• Ainsworth, M. r., Klopf r, W. G., & Holt, R. R.

r evclopments ��Rorschach T cbnique. Vol. 1. N w York:

World Book. 19 54.

Lindner, R. M. Som significant Rorech ch reeponsee.

l: Clin. Psychopath., 1943, � 69-93.

Murstein, B. I. The projection of hoetility on th Ror•chach as the

result of cgo-thr t. l.: proj. Tech., 1956, 2 , 418-438.

-Phillips, L. &t Smith, J. O. Rorach b Interpretation: dvanced

Techniqu . New York: Grune L Str tton, 1953.

Piotrow ki, Z. Perceptanalyeis. N w York: Macmillan, 1957.

Rapaport, r:. riagnoetie Psychological T sting. Vol. n. Chica- o:

Year Book Publishers. 1946.

Rav. J. Anatomy reepon es on the Rorschach t et. J. proj. T ch.

1951. !2.t 433-443.

Report of the Governor'• Commission on The I' viated Criminal

S x Ofi"'nder, Michigan, 1951.

Rorschach, H. P ychodiagnoetics. B rn: Hana Hubt!r, 1942.

Siegel, S. Nonparametric Stati•tics. New York: McGraw-Hill.

1956.

Sjostedt, Elsie M. A Study of the Pe1·eon lity Variables Rda <:c

to As aultive and Acquisitive Crimee. Unpubli•hec:l doctor'•

dissertation. Purdue University, 1955. Cit d by A. H. Bu•••

� Psychology of Aggreeeion. New York: John Wiley, 1961,

P. 124.

Sommer, R. & Sommer, r·. T. Assaultiveness and two types of

Rorschach color rt:apon•e•. J. consult. Psycho!., 1958.

l:3, 57-62.

Storment, C. S. & Finney, B. C. Projection and b h �ior: A

Rorschach study of ass ltive m ntal ho pital patients.

J. ,eroj. Tech. 1953, !!• 349-360.

W gncr, E. E. The interaction of aggr ssive movcm�t and

ana.tomy reeponaea on th, Rorschach in producing anxiety.

J. proj. �-• 1961, � 212-215.

Woli, I. Hostile acting out and Rorschach teat content. !.: eroj.

Tech •• 1957, �• 414-419.

24