Rorschach Test and Systemic Theory

Q3 Psychology
G. Gandino
{"title":"Rorschach Test and Systemic Theory","authors":"G. Gandino","doi":"10.1027/1192-5604/A000111","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. Can we read a Rorschach test without betraying the epistemological systemic premises? The systemic theoretical framework generally does not accept the use of testing, but we find confirmation of its use in some American publications in the late 1950s. In this period, family therapy was born and the Rorschach provided joint administration of the test. The interpretation of the test was prevalently pragmatic: co-administration helped to bring out relationship patterns and styles of communication. This article presents a possible integration to the pragmatic interpretation of the joint Rorschach, through the adoption of a constructivist and semantic theoretical framework. The author believes that subjects are active constructors of their own responses; the investigation of this process offers useful elements to the understanding of neurotic or psychotic levels of functioning. Furthermore, the responses should be read as a story, and the projected meanings can define personality organization. The method is adopted in individual and joint Rorschach testing: From a constructivist perspective, linked to the construction of the image, the pragmatic level overlaps with the semantic nuances of the individual stories in the joint administration. Consequently, systemic theory finds the way of approaching the test coherently with its own premises.","PeriodicalId":39365,"journal":{"name":"Rorschachiana","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rorschachiana","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1192-5604/A000111","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Psychology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract. Can we read a Rorschach test without betraying the epistemological systemic premises? The systemic theoretical framework generally does not accept the use of testing, but we find confirmation of its use in some American publications in the late 1950s. In this period, family therapy was born and the Rorschach provided joint administration of the test. The interpretation of the test was prevalently pragmatic: co-administration helped to bring out relationship patterns and styles of communication. This article presents a possible integration to the pragmatic interpretation of the joint Rorschach, through the adoption of a constructivist and semantic theoretical framework. The author believes that subjects are active constructors of their own responses; the investigation of this process offers useful elements to the understanding of neurotic or psychotic levels of functioning. Furthermore, the responses should be read as a story, and the projected meanings can define personality organization. The method is adopted in individual and joint Rorschach testing: From a constructivist perspective, linked to the construction of the image, the pragmatic level overlaps with the semantic nuances of the individual stories in the joint administration. Consequently, systemic theory finds the way of approaching the test coherently with its own premises.
罗夏测验与系统理论
摘要我们能在不违背认识论系统前提的情况下阅读罗夏墨迹测验吗?系统的理论框架一般不接受测试的使用,但我们在20世纪50年代末的一些美国出版物中发现它的使用得到了证实。在这一时期,家庭疗法诞生了,罗夏墨迹提供了联合管理测试。对测试的解释普遍是务实的:共同管理有助于揭示关系模式和沟通风格。本文通过采用建构主义和语义的理论框架,提出了一种整合联合罗夏测验语用解释的可能性。作者认为,主体是自身反应的主动建构者;对这一过程的研究为理解神经症或精神病水平的功能提供了有用的元素。此外,这些回答应该作为一个故事来阅读,而投射的含义可以定义人格组织。在个体和联合罗夏测试中采用了这种方法:从建构主义的角度来看,语用层面与联合管理中个体故事的语义细微差别重叠,与形象的建构有关。因此,系统理论找到了与自己的前提一致地接近测试的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Rorschachiana
Rorschachiana Psychology-Clinical Psychology
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
10
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信