Perry William
Department of Psychiatry, University of California, San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, La Jolla, California 92093-8218, USA.
Psychol Assess. 2003 Dec;15(4):582-5. doi: 10.1037/1040-3590.15.4.582.
There has been a recent controversy regarding the validity of the Rorschach test. This comment is in response to criticism levied by R. M. Dawes (2001) on the incremental validity of the Ego Impairment Index (EII), a Rorschach-derived measure of cognition, perception, and reasoning. The Dawes articles (1999 and 2001) serve as an example of the recent practice of placing extraordinary challenges on the Rorschach test. Dawes's arguments are examined and parallel examples are provided that demonstrate the bias used to judge the validity of the EII, the Rorschach, and psychological assessment. Still, in the face of criticism, the results (see Dawes, 2001) support the incremental validity of the EII. Thus, the conclusion presented in this Comment is that it is time for us to "call the whole thing off" and end the Rorschach controversy that has occupied so much recent attention and generated so few new ideas.
最近关于罗夏墨迹测验的有效性存在争议。本评论是对R. M. 道斯（2001年）对自我损害指数（EII）的增量效度提出的批评的回应，EII是一种从罗夏墨迹测验衍生出来的用于测量认知、感知和推理的指标。道斯的文章（1999年和2001年）是近期对罗夏墨迹测验提出巨大挑战的一个例子。对道斯的论点进行了审视，并提供了类似的例子，这些例子展示了用于判断EII、罗夏墨迹测验和心理评估效度的偏见。尽管如此，面对批评，结果（见道斯，2001年）支持了EII的增量效度。因此，本评论得出的结论是，现在是我们“叫停整件事”的时候了，结束这场最近备受关注但却几乎没有产生新观点的罗夏墨迹测验争议。
