Jenkins Sharon Rae
a Psychology Department , University of North Texas.
J Pers Assess. 2017 May-Jun;99(3):238-253. doi: 10.1080/00223891.2016.1248972.
Stories told about pictures have been used for both research and clinical practice since the beginning of modern personality assessment. However, with the growing science-practice gap, these thematic apperceptive techniques (TATs) have been used differently in those 2 venues. Scientific validation is presumptively general, but clinical application is idiographic and situation-specific. A bridge is needed. The manualized human-scored narrative analysis systems discussed here are valuable scientist-practitioner tools, but they require a validation literature to support further research publication, maintain their role in clinical training, and justify clinicians' reimbursement by third-party payers. To facilitate wider understanding of manualized TAT methodologies, this article addresses long-standing criticisms of TAT reliability and proposes some strategic solutions to the measurement error problem for both researchers and clinicians, including analyzing person-situation interactions, purposeful situation sampling for within-storyteller comparisons, and uses of small samples. The new rules for TATs include conceptual and methodological standards that researchers should aim to meet and report, reviewers should apply to manuscripts, and clinical assessors can use to analyze their own data and justify third-party payment.
自现代人格评估开始以来，关于图片的讲述故事法就被用于研究和临床实践。然而，随着科学与实践差距的不断扩大，这些主题统觉技术（TATs）在这两个领域的使用方式有所不同。科学验证假定是通用的，但临床应用是个性化且针对具体情况的。需要一座桥梁。这里讨论的人工评分的叙事分析系统是有价值的科学家 - 从业者工具，但它们需要有验证文献来支持进一步的研究发表，维持其在临床培训中的作用，并为临床医生获得第三方支付方的报销提供依据。为了促进对人工TAT方法的更广泛理解，本文回应了对TAT可靠性的长期批评，并为研究人员和临床医生提出了一些针对测量误差问题的战略解决方案，包括分析人 - 情境相互作用、为故事讲述者内部比较进行有目的的情境抽样以及使用小样本。TAT的新规则包括研究人员应努力达到并报告的概念和方法标准、审稿人应应用于稿件的标准，以及临床评估人员可用于分析自己的数据并证明第三方支付合理性的标准。
