Projective Techniques

Despite trying to remain objective, individuals’ personalities and personal interpretations might unconsciously influence their responses to personality assessments. Projective techniques attempt to tap into this unconsciousness. Unlike the directness of self-report inventories, these performance-based measures rely on interpreting the performance of clients as they respond to ambiguous stimuli. Projective techniques include the Thematic Apperception Test (TAT), the House-Tree-Person (HTP), the Tell-Me-A-Story (TEMAS), and the Incomplete Sentence Blank tests (ISB). As a psychologist, in what circumstances might projective techniques be an effective assessment method?

For this Discussion, review this week’s Learning Resources. Select two projective instruments from the following list: Thematic Apperception Test (TAT), House-Tree-Person (HTP) Test, Incomplete Sentence Blank (ISB), and Tell-Me-A-Story (TEMAS) Assessment. Consider the similarities and differences between the two instruments you selected and the insights you gained from your comparison. Finally, think about three challenges related to the use of the instruments you selected.

With these thoughts in mind:

Write a comparison (similarities and differences) of the two projective instruments you selected and explain what insight you gained from making that comparison. Explain three challenges related to the use of the projective instruments you selected.

Reference:

• Anastasi, A., & Urbina, S. (2009). Psychological testing (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  • Chapter 15, “Projective Techniques,” (pp. 410–442)
• Flanagan, R., & Di Guiseppe, R. (1999). Critical review of the TEMAS: A step within the development of thematic apperception instruments. Psychology in the Schools, 36(1), 21–30.
  Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.
• Garb, H. N., Wood, J. M., Lilienfeld, S. O., & Nezworski, M. T. (2002). Effective use of projective techniques in clinical practice: Let the data help with selection and interpretation. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 33(5), 454–463.
  Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.