Congratulations! Wikipedia has managed to piss of another segment of society. Psychologists can now be added to a growing list that includes Encyclopedia Britannica, Scientologists, high school teachers, and UK censors.
via i09: Wikipedia now includes not only the questions, but potential answers and marking criteria, for the traditional Rorschach blot test (spoilers there). So you can study up to prove your sanity (or insanity if you’re after a section 8)
I did not realise that their was such a stock set of 10 images. I knew their had to be a stock (in order to have some level of objectivity in analysis), but did not realise that all subjects would get the same 10 images everytime. Isn’t this sort of exposé sort of inevitable. Surely someone sweating an upcoming test can find, at the very least, a psychology textbook that would have the exact same information that Wikipedia now contains. Or do they do a full background check on people purchasing such texts to ensure they are part of the inner circle of psychology?
Now why don’t we have some fun.
(If you want to test yourself, write down your initial responses now, otherwise I might ‘prime’ you. Be as detailed or succinct as you like.)
Have a look at my jumbled responses below the fold. See if you can match them with right image (and your own responses). You can then go back to the Wikipedia page and look at the ‘official responses’ and feel free to play psychologist.
- The Fonz. “Aaay!”
- A man in a tuxedo looking at his reflection over a washbasin.
- A fox.
- Butterfly. D’uh.
- The star sign Capricorn (half goat-half fish).
- A wombat.
- An archangel.
- Scapula (shoulder blade) X-ray.
- Some sort of underground dragon-riding crab-jousting ring.
- A beaver. And a manta ray. And a lion. And Mothra.