Shapes that are untypical for three- and four-year-old children
Shapes that are phallic symbols
Jiggly lines that indicate anxiety
Straight mouths that mean people can't say anything.
Jagged mouths that mean anxiety
A mouth that is open and oval shaped
Eyeballs that are scribbled around
Eyes that are two different colors
Drawing something and then covering it up
Drawings something and not talking about it
Colors are very important and significant:
Black means the child is frightened or distressed; black is a morbid down color
Red means angry, unless the child is drawing a pretty red flower, when it is healthy
If every thing is the picture is red or red and black, this is very suspicious.
Blue, brown, and orange mean fear, anger, and depression
Pink, red, and green are healthy colors.
There appears to be no visual/motor neurological dysfunction with the Bender Gestalt. Personality interpretation reveals difficulty with dissonant elements of her personality, anxiety, timidity, possible paranoia, and marked ambivalence. She seems emotionally constricted, may lack impulse control, is perfectionistic and obsessive-compulsive, and may manifest dissociation, splitting, or isolation mechanisms. She may feel impotent. In addition she indicates much difficulty with sexuality and aggression. She may have a fear of penetration, anxiety about phallic symbols, or castration anxiety. She may have a desire to return to the womb and/or possible suicidal tendencies. She may have significant problems with ego boundaries.The HTP and TAT were similarly interpreted as indicating extreme psychopathology and the psychologist concluded that the woman had major weaknesses in areas crucial to parenting and was in need of long-term, intensive, analytically-oriented therapy, and therefore the father should have custody.
Now that I am no longer a member of the American Psychological Association Ethics Committee, I can express my personal opinion that the use of Rorschach interpretations in establishing an individual's legal status and child custody is the single most unethical practice of my colleagues. It is done, widely. Losing legal rights as a result of responding to what is presented as a "test of imagination," often in the context of "helping" violates what I believe to be a basic ethical principle in this society - that people are judged on the basis of what they do, not on the basis of what they feel, think, or might have a propensity to do. And being judged on an invalid assessment of such thoughts, feelings, and propensities amounts to losing one's civil rights on an essentially random basis.
[a] ... highly defensive stance which is accompanied with blocking, censoring, and inhibition of his underlying affect ... an undercurrent of anxiety, unrequited love, and cloaked sexuality ... difficulty with relating appropriately to others ... latent polymorphous perverse orientation to the environment ... fantasies (that may include) homosexual, bisexual, and exhibitionist feelings ... hostility toward women ...Examination of the man's actual responses to the Rorschach yields no evidence for interpreting his Rorschach as pathological. Although there is indication of scoring, apparently using the Klopfer or Beck scoring approaches, there is no report of any of the ratios and no attempt to base any of the interpretations upon either a scoring summary or specific responses.
The "take home" MMPI should be avoided in the forensic situation ... This practice can lead to questions as to whether the individual took the test in the standard way and whether all of the responses are purely his own, as highlighted by Graham's amusing anecdote about the mental hospital patient who had his ward colleagues assist him by voting on the appropriate answers.
Although based on peer nominations of subjects as strong, confident, influential, unintimidated in face-to-face situations, and showing initiative and leadership ... the title "dominance" may be partially misleading. That is, the scale reflects taking charge of one's own life - or not taking charge - considerably more than bossiness or being overbearing ... Do should be interpreted as taking charge of one's life ... e.g. as self-organizing, making workable plans, and meeting deadlines. This description, was, in fact, quite accurate for this man.
|1. Buros OK (Ed.): The Seventh Mental Measurements Yearbook. High-land Park, NJ, Gryphon Press, 1972|
|2. Buros OK (Ed.): The Tenth Mental Measurements Yearbook. Highland Park, NJ, Gryphon Press, 1989|
|3. Whitworth RH: Bender Gestalt Motor Gestalt Test, in Test Critiques, Vol.1. Edited by Keyser DJ, Sweetland RC. Kansas City, MO, Test Corporation of America, 1984|
|4. Millon T: Manual for the MCMI-II, 2nd Edition. Minneapolis. MN, National Computer Systems, 1987|
|5. Choca JP, Shanley LA, Van Denburg E: Interpretative Guide to the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory. Washington, DC, American Psychological Association, 1992|
|6. Buros OK (Ed.): The Eighth Mental Measurements Yearbook. Highland Park, NJ, Gryphon Press, 1978|
|7. Dawes R: Rational Choice in an Uncertain World. New York, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1988|
|8. Ziskin J: Clinical Notes on the MMPI. Use of the MMPI in Forensic Settings. Minneapolis, MN, National Computer Systems, 1981|
|9. Butcher JN (Ed.): Computerized Psychological Assessment: A Practitioner's Guide. New York, Basic Books, Inc., 1987|
|10. Lachar D: The MMPI: Clinical Assessment and Automated Interpretation. Los Angeles, Western Psychological Services, 1974|
|11. Fowler R: Workshop on the MMPI. Guadalupe, December 1981|
|12. Graham J: The MMPI: A Practical Guide. New York, Oxford University Press, 1977|
|13. Duckworth JC: MMPI Interpretation Manual for Counselors and Clinicians, Second Edition. Muncie, IN, Accelerated Development Inc,, 1979|
|14. Graham 3: Assessing psychological factors relating to domestic relations. Presentation at The Mental Health Professional as an Expert Witness: A Conference for Psychologists and Psychiatrists, Orlando, Florida, May 20-22, 1988|
|15. Wakefield H, Underwager R: Accusations of Child Sexual Abuse. Springfield, IL, C.C. Thomas, 1988|
|16. Wakefield H, Underwager R: Scale 6 elevations in MMPIs of persons accused of child sexual abuse. Presentation at the 23rd Annual Symposium on Recent Developments in the Use of the MMPI, St. Petersburg, Florida, March 1988|
|17. Butcher IN, Williams CL, Graham JR, Archer RP, Tellegen A, BenPorath YS, Kaemmer B: MMPI-A (Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-Adolescent): Manual for Administration, Scoring, and Interpretation. Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press, 1992|
|18. Caldwell AB: MMPI Supplementary Scale Manual. Los Angeles, Caidwell Reports, 1988|
|19. Nichols HR, Molinder I: The Multiphasic Sex Inventory Manual (Available from Nichols and Molinder, 437 Bowes Drive, Tacoma, WA 98466), 1984|
|20. Nichols HR, Molinder I: personal communication, 1990|
|21. Murphy WD: |
Psychophysiological assessment of sexual arousal: uses and misuses. Presented at the Second International Conference on the Treatment of Sex Offenders, Minneapolis, MN, September 22-24, 1991
|22. Farrall WR: personal communication, September22, 1991|
|23. Card RD, Farrall W: Detecting faked penile responses to erotic stimuli: a comparison of stimulus conditions and response measures. Annals of Sex Research 1990; 3:4:381-396|
|24. Grossman LS, Haywood TW, Cavanaugh JL: Deviant sexual responsiveness on penile plethysmography: pedophiles versus normal controls. Paper presented as part of the paper session titled "Research on Sexual Offenders" at the 97th annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, August 11-15, 1989, New Orleans, Louisiana|
|25. McAnulty RD, Andrew M: Characteristics of individuals who deny the validity of child molestation allegations. Paper presented at convention of the Association for the Advancement of Behavior Therapy, Washington, DC, November 1989|
|26. Travin S, Cullen K, Melella JT: The use and abuse of erection measurements: a forensic perspective. Bull American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law 1988; 16:3:235-250|
|27. Committee on Professional Standards and Committee on Psychological Tests and Assessment: Guidelines for Computer-Based Tests and Interpretations. Washington, DC, American Psychological Association, 1986|
|28. Landers S: Use of 'detailed dolls" questioned: defense lawyers claim doll use leads to false reports of abuse. The American Psychological Association Monitor 1988; 19:6:24-25|
|29. Underwager R, Wakefield H: The Real World of Child Interrogations. Springfield, IL, C.C. Thomas, 1990|
|30. Underwager R, Wakefield H: More effective child interviewing procedures in sexual abuse allegations. Workshop presented at the Seventh Annual Symposium in Forensic Psychology, Newport beach, California, May 2-5, 1991|
|31. Wakefield H. Underwager R: Evaluating the child witness in sexual abuse cases: interview or inquisition? American Journal of Forensic Psychology 1989; 7:3:43-69|
|32. APA Council of Representatives: Statement on the use of anatomically detailed dolls in forensic evaluations. Washington, DC, American Psychological Association, 1991|
|33. Kendall-Tackett KA: (1992). Beyond anatomical dolls: professionals' use of other play therapy techniques. Child Abuse and Neglect 1992; 16:139-142|
|34. American Psychological Association: Ethical principles of psychologists. American Psychologist 1990; 36:633-638|
|35. American Psychological Association: Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. American Psychologist 1992; 47:1597-1611|
|36. American Psychological Association: Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing. Washington, DC, Author, 1985|