ロールシャッハテストはまちがっている
--科学からの異議

What's Wrong with the Rorschach -- Science Confronts the Controversial Inkblot Test

James M. Wood, M. Teresa Nezworski, Scott O. Lilienfeld, Howard N. Garb (著) (2003)
宮崎謙一(訳)

北大路書房 ; ISBN: 4762824836 (2006)
353 pages

Preface to the Japanese Edition of "What's Wrong With the Rorschach?"

The fields of clinical psychology and psychiatry have made remarkable progress during the 85 years since the Rorschach Inkblot Test was first developed. Effective treatments for schizophrenia, mood disorders, anxiety disorders, eating disorders, and sexual problems are now available. Valuable psychological tests have been developed to measure intelligence and academic performance, neuropsychological deficits, and many aspects of personality. Knowledge of psychological disorders has advanced substantially, although much more remains to be learned.

First published in 1921, the Rorschach is an antiquated technique based on theories that have been discarded during the years since it was introduced. First hailed as a "psychological x-ray" that could provide a deep picture of a patient's personality, in the 1950s and 1960s the Rorschach became the focus of widespread scientific scrutiny and was shown to be useless for most purposes (although with some value as a measure of schizophrenia-like disordered thought). By 1970 the glowing claims originally made for the Rorschach had been thoroughly discredited by research.

The Rorschach has become the focus of intense controversy in the United States where, despite the test's poor performance, a substantial number of clinical psychologists continue to use it. These enthusiasts contend that, in their clinical experience, the test seems to work. In contrast, research-oriented psychologists have argued that that a test should not be used merely because it "seems" to work. Instead, a psychological test should be used only for purposes for which it has demonstrated its worth in careful scientific studies. Because the Rorschach is sometimes used by expert witnesses in the courtroom, the controversy surrounding the test has attracted the attention of lawyers and judges. After all, should results from a controversial test be used to help form important legal decisions?

The present book, What's Wrong With the Rorschach?, describes the long and fascinating history of the Rorschach Inkblot Test and examines both its scientific flaws and few valid clinical uses . When first published in 2003, the book attracted considerable attention in the United States and Europe, with stories in the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, the London Times Educational Supplement, and the German magazine Der Spiegel. The noted critic Frederick Crewes wrote in the New York Review of Books that "readers of What's Wrong With the Rorschach? will find no more lucid primer on the requirements of scientific prudence as they relate to the authentication of psychological tests.... The story told in the book, by turns appalling and amusing, reads like a parable of the larger struggle between science and pseudoscience."

Not surprisingly, the book also met with severe criticism from some psychologists devoted to the Rorschach. In general, die-hard Rorschach advocates have either reacted to the book with extreme anger, or simply dismissed it, along with the scientific evidence it presents. Chapter 9 of the book actually predicted that Rorschach advocates would reject its arguments, because they have been rejecting legitimate scientific criticism in the same way for the past 50 years. Nevertheless, we hope that regardless of their views of the Rorschach, all Japanese readers will find our arguments to be worthy of careful consideration.

We wish to thank Dr. Ken 'ichi Miyazaki for translating our book into Japanese at a particularly appropriate time. Although the Rorschach has been engulfed in scientific controversy in the United States, some American psychologists have recently attempted to export a version of the test called the Comprehensive System for the Rorschach to Japan and encourage its use there. In their enthusiasm, these psychologists have made what we consider grandiose and unrealistic claims. By and large, they have neglected to inform Japanese psychologists that the Rorschach is highly controversial in the United States and held in very low esteem by most research-oriented psychologists there.

Dr. Miyazaki's translation will allow our Japanese colleagues and other interested readers to learn about the history of the Rorschach, understand why it is controversial, and gain a greater appreciation for the importance of science to clinical practice. After reading this translation, many Japanese psychologists may conclude that the Rorschach should not be used at all. Others may decide to use Dr. Edwin Wagner's "Logical Rorschach," discussed in Chapter 10 of our book, which aims to measure only reality testing and thought disorder.

In any case, we are hopeful that Japanese psychologists will consider the evidence carefully. May we all continue to advance along the broad road of scientific progress. At a time when clinical psychology and psychiatry are making steady advances, the 85-year-old Rorschach is unlikely to provide new answers or valuable information to mental health professionals.

James M. Wood
M. Teresa Nezworski
Scott O. Lilienfeld
Howard N. Garb