Exner J E
Rorschach Workshops, Asheville, NC 28815-9010.
J Pers Assess. 1991 Aug;57(1):37-41; discussion 42-5. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa5701_5.
These comments address three interrelated issues posed in Kramer's article concerning Rorschach's definition of the M response and the criteria for M that is applied in the Comprehensive System, the possibility that M may be overscored by the criteria for the Comprehensive System, and the issue of whether the Rorschach is amenable to quantification and empirical scrutiny. Kramer has oversimplified and misconstrued statements by Rorschach, Beck, and Bohm; in reality, the criterion for the scoring of M responses in the Comprehensive System differs very little, if at all, from that suggested by Rorschach. The accumulated history of the test seems to confirm that it is amenable to quantification and empirical scrutiny.
这些评论涉及克莱默文章中提出的三个相互关联的问题，即罗夏墨迹测验中M反应的定义以及综合系统中应用的M标准、综合系统的标准可能导致M被过度计分的可能性，以及罗夏墨迹测验是否适合量化和实证检验的问题。克莱默简化并误解了罗夏、贝克和博姆的陈述；实际上，综合系统中M反应计分的标准与罗夏所建议的标准即便有差异，也微乎其微。该测验的历史积累似乎证实了它适合量化和实证检验。
