On This Page:
Projective tests in psychology are assessment tools that present individuals with ambiguous stimuli, prompting them to interpret or create stories about them. Common examples include the Rorschach inkblot and Thematic Apperception tests (TAT).
The idea behind projective tests is that when individuals are presented with ambiguous stimuli, such as pictures or inkblots, they will project their unconscious feelings, thoughts, and desires onto their interpretations of these stimuli. By analyzing these responses, psychologists aim to gain insight into the individual’s social behavior, thoughts, emotions, and potential internal conflicts.
The responses reveal underlying emotions, desires, and conflicts, based on the idea that people project their unconscious feelings onto the ambiguous stimuli.
Thematic Apperception Test
The Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) is a projective psychological test wherein individuals view ambiguous pictures and then create stories about them.
By analyzing the narratives, psychologists aim to gain insight into the individual’s emotions, inner conflicts, and interpersonal dynamics, as it’s believed that personal experiences and underlying feelings influence the created stories.
The thematic apperception test taps into a person’s unconscious mind to reveal the repressed aspects of their personality.
The Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) cards are primarily designed for individuals aged 14 and older. However, there are variations of the test, like the Children’s Apperception Test (CAT), specifically tailored for children aged 3 to 10 years. The selection of cards and interpretation are adjusted based on the age and developmental level of the individual.
Procedure
Although the picture, illustration, drawing, or cartoon used must be interesting enough to encourage discussion, it should be vague enough not to immediately give away what the project is about.
TAT can be used in various ways, from eliciting qualities associated with different products to perceptions about the kind of people who might use certain products or services.
The examiner presents a selection of TAT cards one by one. While there are 31 cards in a standard TAT deck, usually only 10-12 are selected for a single session, based on the individual’s age, gender, and other factors.
For each card, the individual creates and tells a story based on the image. The examiner typically remains passive, allowing the individual to provide their narrative without interruption. If the individual is hesitant, the examiner might prompt or encourage elaboration.
The person must look at the picture(s) and tell a story. For example:
- What has led up to the event shown
- What is happening at the moment
- What the characters are thinking and feeling
- What the outcome of the story was
Once all the stories are told, the examiner may ask follow-up questions to clarify certain points or explore parts of the narratives in more depth.
How do you interpret a TAT test?
After the test, the examiner reviews the narratives, analyzing them for themes, conflicts, emotions, interpersonal dynamics, and other relevant psychological insights. The TAT’s results are then often integrated with other assessment data to form a comprehensive psychological profile.
It’s important to note that TAT interpretation is subjective, and there can be variability in interpretations.
The skill of the psychologist, their familiarity with the test, and their understanding of the individual all play crucial roles in the interpretation process.
- Story Content: The psychologist examines the narratives for common themes, conflicts, characters, and resolutions.
- Emotional Responses: The expressed emotions, anxieties, and feelings in the stories are noted.
- Interpersonal Dynamics: Relationships between characters can provide insight into the individual’s interpersonal relationships and their view of social dynamics.
- Projection: Since TAT is a projective test, personal experiences, desires, fears, and conflicts are believed to be projected onto the characters and events of the stories.
- Consistency: Patterns in responses across multiple cards can provide robust insights into persistent themes or concerns in an individual’s life.
- Comparison to Norms: While TAT doesn’t have strict “norms” like some other tests, experienced psychologists often use their knowledge of typical responses to gauge the uniqueness or concern of a particular narrative.
- Integration with Other Information: The TAT results are often integrated with other clinical data, interviews, and assessments to form a comprehensive understanding of the individual.
Draw a Person Test
The Draw A Person Test, often abbreviated as DAP, is a projective psychological assessment that asks an individual to draw a person.
It’s used to evaluate cognitive development in children and, in some interpretations, to gain insights into an individual’s personality, emotions, or potential psychological disorders. The drawn figures are analyzed based on various criteria, including detail, proportion, and presence or omission of features.
Figure drawings are projective diagnostic techniques in which an individual is instructed to draw a person, object, or situation to assess cognitive, interpersonal, or psychological functioning.
The test can be used to evaluate children and adolescents for various purposes (e.g. self-image, family relationships, cognitive ability, and personality).
Procedure
In most cases, figure-drawing tests are given to children. This is because it is a simple, manageable task that children can relate to and enjoy.
The child is instructed to draw a picture of a person. Sometimes, further instructions are given, such as drawing a man, a woman, and themselves on separate sheets. This can allow for a more varied assessment.
After the drawing is completed, the examiner may ask the individual about the drawing. Open-ended questions can include:
- Who is the person in the drawing?
- What is the person doing?
- What might the person be thinking or feeling?
- “What kind of day is this person having?”
Questions might be posed to understand the emotions behind certain elements of the drawing: “How does this person feel about what’s happening?”
If the drawing has ambiguous or unclear elements, the examiner might ask about them, e.g., “I’m curious about this over here, can you explain it?”
Interpretation
The examiner evaluates the drawing based on a variety of criteria. This can include the size of the drawing, the placement on the page, the presence or omission of body parts, the level of detail, and other aspects. For some standardized versions of the DAP, scoring systems are in place, but interpretations can still be subjective.
It’s essential to approach the analysis with caution. While these interpretations can offer insights, they are not definitive diagnoses. Individual and cultural differences, as well as context, play a crucial role in understanding the meaning behind the drawings.
- Body Proportions: The size and proportion of the drawn figure can be indicative of self-perception and self-esteem. A tiny figure might indicate feelings of insignificance or insecurity, while an overly large one might hint at inflated self-importance.
- Omissions: Missing body parts (like hands, feet, or ears) can be significant. For example, omission of hands might be linked to feelings of helplessness, though interpretations can vary.
- Placement on the Page: A figure drawn in the corner might suggest feelings of isolation or marginalization, whereas central placement might indicate a balanced self-concept.
- Detail Level: An excessive amount of detail or focus on specific body parts can indicate fixation or heightened significance. Conversely, lack of detail might suggest avoidance or neglect.
- Sequencing: If multiple figures are drawn, the sequence or order of the drawings might offer insights. For instance, drawing oneself last could hint at self-neglect or prioritizing others.
- Interactions: The interactions (or lack thereof) between figures, if multiple are drawn, can indicate interpersonal dynamics or feelings of connectivity or isolation.
Some figure-drawing tests are primarily measures of cognitive abilities or cognitive development. In these tests, there is a consideration of how well a child draws and the content of a child’s drawing. In some tests, the child’s self-image is considered through the drawings.
The Draw-a-Person: QSS (Quantitative Scoring System) is a standardized version of the Draw-A-Person test developed to assess intellectual functioning, primarily in children. It uses objective criteria and a scoring system to evaluate the drawings to estimate cognitive abilities.
In other figure-drawing tests, interpersonal relationships are assessed by having the child draw a family or some other situation in which more than one person is present.
Some tests are used for the evaluation of child abuse. Other tests involve personality interpretation through drawings of objects, such as a tree or a house, as well as people.
Finally, some figure drawing tests are used as part of the diagnostic procedure for specific psychological or neuropsychological impairment types, such as central nervous system dysfunction or mental retardation.
Example
The House-Tree-Person (HTP) test (Buck, 1948) provides a measure of a self-perception and attitudes by requiring the test taker to draw a house, a tree, and a person.
- The picture of the house is supposed to conjure the child’s feelings toward his or her family.
- The picture of the tree is supposed to elicit feelings of strength or weakness. The picture of the person, as with other figure drawing tests, elicits information regarding the child’s self-concept.
The HTP, though mostly given to children and adolescents, is appropriate for anyone over the age of three.
Critical Evaluation
Advantages
- Depth of Insight: Can provide rich, qualitative data about an individual’s unconscious motives, conflicts, and interpersonal dynamics. Because it’s less likely to elicit socially desirable responses, the individual is unlikely to deduce what is being measured, ensuring that behavior remains natural and consistent.
- Flexibility: Suitable for diverse populations and can be adapted for different age groups.
- Less Direct: As an indirect method, it might allow individuals to express thoughts and feelings they might withhold with direct questioning.
Disadvantages
- Subjectivity: The major criticism of projective techniques is their lack of objectivity. Such methods are unscientific and do not objectively measure attitudes in the same way as a Likert scale. Interpretation highly depends on the examiner’s skill, leading to potential variability in conclusions.
- Lack of Standardization: There isn’t a standardized scoring system, which can limit the test’s reliability and validity.
- Time-Consuming: Both administration and interpretation can be lengthy.
- Cultural Bias: Some cards or interpretations might not be culturally appropriate or relevant for all individuals.
References
Bellak, L., & Bellak, S. S. (1949). Children’s Apperception Test.
Bellak, L. (1954). The Thematic Apperception Test and the Children’s Apperception Test in clinical use.
Bellak, L., & Abrams, D. M. (1997). The Thematic apperception test, the children’s apperception test, and the senior apperception technique in clinical use. Allyn & Bacon.
Buck, J. N. (1948). The HTP technique; a qualitative and quantitative scoring manual. Journal of clinical psychology.
Flanagan, R., & Motta, R. W. (2007). Figure drawings: A popular method. Psychology in the Schools, 44(3), 257-270.
Goodenough, F. L. (1926). Measurement of intelligence by drawings. World Book Company.
Harris, D. (1963). Children’s drawings as measures of intellectual maturity. New York, NY: Harcourt, Brace & World.
Kamphaus, R. W., & Pleiss, K. L. (1991). Draw-a-Person techniques: Tests in search of a construct. Journal of School Psychology, 29(4), 395-401.
Naglieri, J. A., McNeish, T. J., & Bardos, A. N. (1988). Draw a Person [DAP]: A Quantitative Scoring System. Psychological Corporation.
Osgood, C.E, Suci, G., & Tannenbaum, P. (1957). The Measurement of Meaning. University of Illinois Press, 1
Reynolds, C. R., & Hickman, J. A. (2004). Draw-a-person Intellectual Ability Test for Children, Adolescents, and Adults. Pro-ed.
Scott, L. H. (1981). Measuring intelligence with the Goodenough-Harris Drawing Test. Psychological bulletin, 89(3), 483.
Smith, D., & Dumont, F. (1995). A cautionary study: Unwarranted interpretations of the Draw-A-Person Test. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 26(3), 298.
