直接问询对罗夏测验成绩的影响

J. Reisman
{"title":"直接问询对罗夏测验成绩的影响","authors":"J. Reisman","doi":"10.1080/0091651X.1970.10380271","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Summary 33 Ss were administered the Rorschach and had a traditional, nonleading inquiry. An equal number of Ss took the Rorschach and had a direct inquiry in which they were asked specifically whether or not a certain determinant had been relevant. The results indicated no significant difference in the numbers of determinants produced by the two groups. It was suggested that a standardized, direct inquiry would be of considerable value in administering and understanding the Rorschach.","PeriodicalId":78361,"journal":{"name":"Journal of projective techniques & personality assessment","volume":"34 1","pages":"388-390"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1970-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/0091651X.1970.10380271","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Effect of a Direct Inquiry on Rorschach Scores\",\"authors\":\"J. Reisman\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/0091651X.1970.10380271\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Summary 33 Ss were administered the Rorschach and had a traditional, nonleading inquiry. An equal number of Ss took the Rorschach and had a direct inquiry in which they were asked specifically whether or not a certain determinant had been relevant. The results indicated no significant difference in the numbers of determinants produced by the two groups. It was suggested that a standardized, direct inquiry would be of considerable value in administering and understanding the Rorschach.\",\"PeriodicalId\":78361,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of projective techniques & personality assessment\",\"volume\":\"34 1\",\"pages\":\"388-390\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1970-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/0091651X.1970.10380271\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of projective techniques & personality assessment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/0091651X.1970.10380271\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of projective techniques & personality assessment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0091651X.1970.10380271","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

33名受试者接受了罗夏墨迹测验,并进行了传统的非引导性询问。同样数量的s接受了罗夏墨迹测验,并接受了一个直接的询问,在这个询问中,他们被明确地问到某个决定因素是否相关。结果表明,两组产生的决定因子数量没有显著差异。有人建议,一个标准化的、直接的询问将对管理和理解罗夏墨迹测验有相当大的价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Effect of a Direct Inquiry on Rorschach Scores
Summary 33 Ss were administered the Rorschach and had a traditional, nonleading inquiry. An equal number of Ss took the Rorschach and had a direct inquiry in which they were asked specifically whether or not a certain determinant had been relevant. The results indicated no significant difference in the numbers of determinants produced by the two groups. It was suggested that a standardized, direct inquiry would be of considerable value in administering and understanding the Rorschach.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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