Ink blot tests

Post Reply New Topic

I remember taking 2-3 ink blot tests a year in elementary school. Most of the time they resembled nothing to me. I kept telling them it looks like spilled ink on paper. They kept on me untill I told them what they wanted to hear. The whole thing was just to much for me.
The other thing they did was the half a glass of water. Is it half empty or is it have full? I always said it was both and again they pressed and pressed for one or the other. I finally shut them up with the answer it's full, half water and half air.


Did any one else have to deal with this in school?

Not personally, no, but that's ridiculous. The whole point of the ink blot test is to make sense of (or talk about) your individual response, not to force you to conform. As for the glass one, it's slightly more understandable, because as far as I know it is testing optimist vs pessimism? They can't really move forward without one or the other answer, if they are following the instructions on how to interpret responses. Though if they just think a bit outside the square (as you clearly do) then they should be able to work with your unique answer.

No, I didn't. But reading this, it sounds like torture rather than a test. Sounds a lot like a "Whatever you say, it's incorrect", that would have lowered my self-esteem a lot.

My standardized answer for the glass question is:
"If you filled it only to a half, it is half full, if you drank from it, it is half empty. If you refuse to tell me if you drank from it or not, one half is filled with water and the other half filled with air.", which is funny, because you seem to have the same "stop asking"-response on this one as me.

It's like the "what was first, the egg or the chicken"-question.
My answer is:
"Eggs existed before chicken, just think of dinosaurs, they layed eggs too, chicken as we know them developed later."

Thank you for your response I thought it was ridiculous but never a base of reference for it.

Did they continue to ask you the glass question after your response or did they stop?
I'm just curious.

They stopped when I told them that along with telling them I'm a realist.

I took part in a psychological experiment being conducted by someone working on a psychology degree.

I went into a room with two other people and we were shown a series of ink blots. The tester would start from the left asking each of us what we thought it looked like. The other two would say it looked like something, but I didn't think it looked like that at all and would say something else.

The only time we agreed was when I was given the opportunity to go first once and then the other two agreed with me.

The other two subjects even tried arguing with me about it on a couple of the ink blots.

I was really reaching to say that any of them reminded me of anything. The only reason I said they resembled anything was because I knew that we were supposed to think that they resembled something. I remember that I said that one of them resembled a bear, but that was mainly because of all the ink, not any particular pattern in the ink blot.

After all was over, I found out that the test was to see how sociable we were. The guy who was administering the experiment was pretty ticked off at me and declared that I was the most anti-social person he ever met.

I've never been tested, but when I've looked at these tests I just see ink. I could probably draw something out of them.

I'm also glad that I'm not the only person who'd rather argue the glass was full as I'm pretty sure whether I said half full or empty would flip depending what words came first to my head rather than the response reflect my state of mind.

Did they know about your ASD going in? The phenomenon of the first subject "leading" the following subjects is pretty well-documented. That's why, at an eyewitness identification procedure (at least in the States) the police have to test each witness separately.
I'm not surprised that an Aspy or Autistic would throw a wrench in the effect, but I'm curious what new information they were hoping to learn.

The Rorshach test is itself subjective in my opinion (to the examiner to be honest). Its a long outdated test, where its results dont really mean all that much (even if you use Exner scoring method).

There are too many variable involved in results of that test vs what a person actually sees. Variables like is the person seated or standing during administration. Is the lighting correct in the room. How the card are oriented during the test.

There has been such controversy over its results that I believe in the states, certain entities attempted to sue over the validity of the test and how it compares to standardization.

In my opinion it doesnt.

I looked at this test together with my son a few months ago. We both saw just blots. After looking for a long time we could come up with something that might resemble that particular bot, but I think it's a silly test.
Just like shapes in clouds; I mostly fail to see those too. They are just clouds.
Funnily enough I often come up with fantasized interpretations of rock formations and trees. I imagine they were giants who have been petrified (or woodified?) by a powerful mage.

Do they still use rorschach tests?

Rorschach ink blot tests are so ridiculous. My awesome former psychologist (he retired) was giving me a bunch of tests yet i refused the ink blot test. I felt since i knew what the standard answers were, it would sway the outcome so that i couldn't fairly take the test, so i never did.

What i did find interesting was that supposedly the results for Autism are the same for Schizophrenia... Not sure if this is confirmed, yet what i had researched.

This was in the early 80s

I had to do them in 1989. In some of them I didn't see anything and there was at least one where I said I didn't see anything because my answer would have likely been considered quite disturbing. I don't see how that says anything about me. It's what it looked like.