The hard science of Rorschach research: What do we know and where do we go

As the final article in the Special Series on "The Utility of the Rorschach for Clinical Assessment, " the authors provide an overview of this instrument's current status. They begin with a thorough review of global and focused meta-analyses, including an expanded analysis of K. C. H. Parker, R. K. Hanson, and J. Hunsley's (1988) data set, and conclude that Rorschach, Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory, and IQ scales each produce roughly similar effect size magnitudes, although all tests have greater validity for some purposes than for others. Because this evidentiary foundation justifies addressing other issues, the authors build on contributions to the Special Series to identify 11 salient theoretical and empirical gaps in the Rorschach knowledge base and make recommendations for addressing these challenges to further the evolution of the Rorschach and document its strengths and inherent limitations. As the final article in the Special Series on "The Utility of the Rorschach for Clinical Assessment, " the double meaning of hard science in our title aptly conveys what we see as our dual agenda. The first is to help organize the basic, reproducible, quantitative, rigorous evidence addressing the Rorschach's validity. The second is to help identify the difficult challenges that face those conduct