Re: Evaluating abuse cases

[Thomas Oellerich <oelleric@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Whoa there Jim!

You can get reliable measures with a ruler with unequal spaces. Not, however, a valid measurement As Dawes stated so well -- The accuracy f the judgment of professional psychologists and other mental health workers is limited, however, by the accuracy of the techniques they employ (House of cards, 107). If the measure is invalid, then presumably so is the judgment upon which it is based. And the Rorschach is not a valid measurement device, as documented by Dawes. So it certainly should not be used in a forensic setting (or in any setting for that matter).


At 12:07 PM 2/8/99 -0600, you wrote:
>>>>

At 09:57 AM 2/8/99 -0600, you wrote:
>You ought not use the Rorschach in a forensic evaluation, it doesn't have sufficient validity or reliability. See what Robyn Dawes wrote abouat it in "The House of Cards." Also, see:

Whoa there, Holly,.... the Rorschach is or is not a useful tool for the psychologist to use depending on the psychologist. I don't conduct evaluations to meet some attorney's test or to protect myself in court, but to lead me to an accurate evaluation of the client. The Rorschach has gained a great deal of "reliability" via the introduction of the
Exner interpretive system, but I don't use that in my work. This is a test, as well as all projective testing, that you will always hear as scary to use in court. But, I promise you I know more about answering the attorney's questions in this area, than he/she does in composing the questions to ask. Even if I were not going to report the Rorschach, I would use it for its value to me in the eval.

>Two or three subtests should not be used to estimate the IQ. If you can't use it as specified in >the manual, use an IQ estimate such as the Shipley.

Tilt again, Holly..... I am free to use any technique I choose, including none, in the manner I described. If I need to know the IQ of a client (a rare event), I will administer the Wechsler in its complete form. However, if I simply want to assure myself of the client's ability to meet the minimum standards for which the MMPI was originally standardized, I will do as I indicated. I do not report the client's IQ based on such an abbreviation but that is not the purpose that I described.

>
>If you are using drawing tests, it is important to limit their use to an interview technique and not try to use any kind of sign interpretation.

Everything I know about a client becomes part of my understanding and report. To assume otherwise is naive. So when I use any projective testing, I gain some insight into how this client functions and that becomes an intergral component of my report. I am not sure what you mean by "sign interpretation" (unless you mean something like looking up a descriptor in a code book of some kind). I am sure that the distinction of use that you are implying is very abstract.

Jim Hord, Ph.D.

<<<<