The most essential features of projective methods are: Cheat sheet: Projective methods of psychodiagnostics. Modern psychodiagnostics. Projective techniques

home

Projective techniques are techniques for indirectly studying personality, based on the construction of a specific, weakly structured stimulus situation, the desire to resolve which contributes to the actualization in the perception of attitudes, relationships and other personal characteristics.

The main feature of projective techniques can be described as a relatively unstructured task, i.e. a problem that allows for an almost unlimited variety of possible answers. In order for the individual’s imagination to freely manifest itself, only brief, general instructions are given. For the same reason, test stimuli are usually vague or ambiguous. The hypothesis on which such tasks are based is that the way an individual perceives and interprets test material or the “structures” of a situation should reflect fundamental aspects of the functioning of his psyche. In other words, the test material is supposed to act as a kind of screen on which the respondent “projects” his characteristic thought processes, needs, anxieties and conflicts.

Typically, projective techniques are also masked testing techniques, since the subject is rarely aware of the type of psychological interpretation that will be given to his answers.

For a long time, peering into the clouds floating across the sky, observing the play of light and shadow on the surface of the sea, people “saw” different animals, creatures, tried to guess their future, considering the bizarre configurations formed when molten wax or lead fell into cold water. It has long been known that the personality of a writer or artist is always present to one degree or another in his works. However, centuries had to pass before well-known observations were used to study personality.

Later, K. Jung believed that emotions influence an individual’s ability to form and perceive ideas. He prepared a list of 100 words and carefully monitored people's behavior as they tried to answer each word with a different word.

Many scientists have welcomed the free association method as a promising diagnostic tool for in-depth personality analysis. Some psychologists, and Jung himself, relied so much on the effectiveness of the free association test that they tried to use it in crime investigations.

In America, G. Kent and A. Rozanov tried to diagnose a mental disorder on the basis of typical free associations reproduced in response to a list of 100 words. Almost nothing came of this, since patients (for example, patients with epilepsy) gave practically no atypical associations. However, an important consequence of this work was that scientists, having examined about a thousand people, compiled an extensive list of associations of healthy people (typical answers). And a little later, Rozanov and his co-authors published the results of a new study: free associations in children. After testing 300 children of various ages, they found that by age 11 there was a significant increase in individual responses.

Projective techniques originated in clinical settings and remain primarily a clinician's tool. The first projective technique, i.e. The Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) by the American psychologist Henry Murray (1935) is considered to be the one that was based on the corresponding theoretical concept - the psychological concept of projection. He views projection as the natural tendency of people to act under the influence of their needs, interests, and entire mental organization.

The concept of “projection” is characterized by the fact that its different interpretations reflect the inherent ambiguity of psychology in understanding even the most important categories and concepts.

Projection (from Latin - throwing out) as a psychological concept first appeared in psychoanalysis and belongs to Sigmund Freud. Projection was seen as one of the defense mechanisms. The process of conflict between unconscious drives and attitudes of society, in accordance with Freud's teachings, is eliminated thanks to a special mental mechanism - projection. Freud, however, also mentions that projection not only arises in the event of a conflict between the “I” and the unconscious, but also takes a major part in the formation of the external world. However, this expanded interpretation of projection was not accepted by psychoanalysis. The understanding of projection as a defense mechanism has been called "classical projection."

It is assumed that classical projection is aimed at negatively evaluated persons, but when an individual becomes aware of negative traits in himself, he endows them with persons towards whom he has a positive attitude. This understanding of projection - endowing other people with one’s own motives, needs, feelings, and, accordingly, understanding their actions - is based on both centuries-old pre-scientific observations and experimental research, and therefore is considered by many psychologists to be the only justified one.

Attributional projection is associated with the ability to evaluate and internalize negative information about one's personality and is a normal process that does not necessarily serve to protect the self. Classic projection is, so to speak, a more “pathological” process, because it indicates an inability to agree with negative information about oneself (Figure 11).

In addition to the two most important types of projection considered, a number of works highlight others. “Autistic projection” has been called a phenomenon that explains the perception of an object by the actual needs of a person. This phenomenon was discovered when subjects were shown defocused images of various objects on a screen. It turned out that images of food were recognized earlier by hungry people than by full ones, and this was called “autism.”

Thus, the theory of projection as a psychological theory has its own path of development. Therefore, when designating certain techniques that exist as projective, existing concepts of projection are applied to them, in relation to the tasks of personality diagnostics.

To designate a certain type of psychological techniques, the concept of projection was first used by Lawrence Frank (full study in 1948). He put forward three basic principles underlying the projective study of personality:

1. Focus on uniqueness in the personality structure (considered as a system of interconnected processes, and not a list of abilities or traits).
2. Personality in the projective approach is studied as a relatively stable system of dynamic processes organized on the basis of needs, emotions and individual experience.
3. 3Every new action, every emotional manifestation of an individual, his perceptions, feelings, statements, motor acts bear the imprint of his personality. This third and main theoretical position is usually called the "projective hypothesis".

Projective techniques are characterized by a global approach to personality assessment. Attention is focused on the overall picture of the personality as such, rather than on measuring individual characteristics. Finally, projective techniques are considered by their proponents as the most effective procedures for discovering hidden, veiled or unconscious aspects of personality. Moreover, it is argued that the less structured the test, the more sensitive it is to such veiled material. This follows from the assumption that the less structured and unambiguous the stimuli, the less likely they are to evoke defensive reactions in the perceiver.

L. Frank does not consider projective techniques as a replacement for existing psychometric ones. Projective techniques successfully complement existing ones, allowing you to look into what is most deeply hidden and escapes when using traditional research techniques.

The following features are common to all projective techniques:

1. uncertainty, ambiguity of the incentives used;
2. no restrictions in choosing an answer;
3. lack of assessment of the test subjects’ answers as “correct” or “wrong”.

The number of existing projective techniques is quite large and is still growing. These tests are a convenient and effective diagnostic tool for studying the inner world of a person. Projective techniques are special techniques for experimental and clinical research of personal characteristics that are not available to survey or observation.

Test classification

The term “projective” was first used in 1939 by L. Frank when combining a number of techniques based on a number of formal characteristics. The classification of tests proposed by Frank is used in psychology to this day.

All projective methods of personality research belong to the following groups:

1. Interpretation techniques (Rozensweig frustration test, TAT, Szondi test).
2. Structuring techniques (Rorschach's Ink Blots).
3. Complementation techniques (unfinished stories and sentences, Jung's association test).
4. Construction techniques (World Test, MAPS).
5. Catharsis techniques (projective play, psychodrama).
6. Methods for studying creative products (drawing of a tree by K. Koch, drawing of a man by Goodenow, Machover, drawing of a house).
7. Methods for studying expression (Mir-i-Lopez myokinetic test, handwriting analysis, etc.).

Features of projective tests

Projective techniques have a number of characteristic features. Firstly, one of the main features of all methods of this type is the uncertainty of instructions and stimulus material, allowing freedom of choice of test solution and behavioral tactics. Often the instructions are vague, ambiguous and given in a very brief or generalized form. Stimulus material acts as a kind of “screen” onto which personal needs, thought processes, internal conflicts and other psychological components should be projected. All questions, images, texts used in projective tests are not indifferent to any test subject, since they appeal to past experience and have a special personal meaning for him. Typically, the patient associates stimulus material with affectogenic situations. The uncertainty of instructions allows us to see the true way a person reacts, not determined by conventional standards. Projective research allows us to reveal the subject’s system of values ​​and motives and see his individually significant experiences. Any projective tests are performed in a friendly atmosphere, in conditions of a non-judgmental attitude of the experimenter towards the subject. This approach allows us to see a deep projection of personality onto stimulus material, not limited by any social assessments. Also, all projective techniques in psychology do not measure individual mental functions of individual

species, and personality in its relationship with the social environment.

Why are such tests needed?

Projective tests can measure emotional, motivational, intellectual aspects of a person, as well as his social attitudes and relationships with other people. Often, projective techniques are used to reveal unconscious, hidden motives and needs of a person. They allow one to obtain rich diagnostic material, which distinguishes them favorably from other psychological research tools.

one of the methods of personality research. Based on identifying projections in experimental data with their subsequent interpretation. The concept of projection to denote a research method was introduced by L. Frank. Characterized by the creation of an experimental situation that allows for a multiplicity of possible interpretations as perceived by the subjects. Behind each interpretation emerges a unique system of personal meanings and style characteristics of the cognitive subject.

The method is provided by a set of projective techniques (also called projective tests), among which are distinguished:

1) associative - for example, the Rorschach blot test and the Holtzman test, where subjects create images based on stimuli - blots; unfinished sentence completion test);

2) interpretive - for example, a thematic apperception test, where you need to interpret the social situation depicted in the picture;

3) expressive - psychodrama, human drawing test, non-existent animal drawing test, etc.

The projective method is aimed at studying unconscious or not fully conscious forms of motivation and therefore is perhaps the only proper psychological method of penetrating into a particularly intimate area of ​​the psyche.

In the light of the concept of personal meaning, it is clear that the effectiveness of these methods is based on the fact that the reflection of the mental, in particular, human consciousness, is biased. Therefore, when describing ambiguous images or performing loosely defined actions, a person involuntarily expresses himself, “projecting” some of his significant experiences and thereby his personal characteristics.

But it is necessary to clarify exactly what features of the personality and its inner world are expressed in the situation of a projective experiment and why exactly this situation contributes to the manifestation of these features. Any obstacles interrupt the action until they are overcome or until the subject refuses to complete the action; in this case, the action turns out to be incomplete either in its external plan or in its internal one - since the decision has not yet been made whether to overcome the obstacle or abandon the action. According to research, unfinished actions and the circumstances surrounding them are involuntarily remembered better than completed ones; In addition, a tendency is formed to complete these actions, and if direct completion is impossible, some kind of replacement actions are performed.

The situation of a projective experiment precisely offers the conditions for a replacement action: with a conscientious attitude towards performing the test, the subject involuntarily turns to his experience, and there the interrupted actions and the situations corresponding to them are stored “closest of all”. And the person, even sometimes consciously, tries to complete the interrupted action, which, however, is only possible in a symbolic sense. A “return” to an interrupted action occurs even when it consisted of hiding the meaning, distorting the meaning of circumstances according to one’s interests. At this symbolic completion of an action, a person applies solutions that are especially inherent to him, constituting his individual style.

This makes clear the requirements for projective stimuli: the degree of their certainty or uncertainty is determined by their applicability for certain substitute actions associated with obstructive meanings of varying degrees of specificity. Thus, the tables of the thematic apperceptive test correspond to meanings associated with obstacles, which can be somehow objectified. The tables of the Rorschach blot test correspond to the meanings of obstacles of a generalized, insufficiently objective nature, the nature of which may lie in the most general features of a person’s individual style - in the features of the functioning of his consciousness, etc. These features are least accessible to awareness, because awareness of what you are thinking about is much simpler and more accessible than awareness of how you think.

Other justifications for the projective method are possible, within the framework of other theories and concepts. Such considerations also lead to an understanding of certain fundamental difficulties. Thus, it is fundamentally difficult to move from the characteristics manifested when performing tests to such personality formations as motives, relationships, attitudes, conflicts, defenses, etc. Personal meanings and their place in the personality structure cannot yet be identified.

From the perspective of psychoanalysis, the object of projective methods is a deeply conflicted, maladapted personality. Therefore, the methods used in the psychoanalytic system have the following distinctive features:

1) focus on diagnosing the causes of maladjustment - unconscious treatments, conflicts and ways to resolve them - protective mechanisms;

2) interpretation of all behavior as a manifestation of the dynamics of unconscious drives;

3) the prerequisite of any projective research - the uncertainty of test conditions - is interpreted as the removal of the pressure of reality, in the absence of which, as expected, the person will manifest forms of behavior that are inherent in him.

The method is projective within the framework of the concepts of holistic psychology: the core of the personality seems to consist of the subjective world of desires, opinions, ideas and other things, and the relationship between the personality and its social environment is the structuring of the “life space” for the creation and maintenance of the “personal world”. These relationships are modeled by a projective experiment, and the projective method acts as a means of understanding the content and structure of the “egg world.” In the foreground is the diagnosis of individual personality characteristics and methods of its normal adaptation.

Many psychologists rate the projective method quite low as a psychometric tool, in particular due to the existence of problems with the reliability and validity of projective tests due to the existing instability of results and inconsistency of data interpretations.

One of the attempts to overcome the crisis in justifying projective methods is to abandon the concept of projection as an explanatory category. An example of such an approach is the concept of apperceptive distortion.

Projective methods

Projective techniques). A class of psychological tests in which subjects respond to ambiguous and unstructured stimuli, which allows them to identify their needs, feelings and conflicts; An example is the Rorschach test.

PROJECTIVE METHODS

a set of research procedures that make it possible to obtain scientifically based data on those attitudes or motives, information about which is subject to certain distortions when applying direct research procedures. Distortion of information can have several reasons: the respondent’s unawareness of his true motives and attitudes; respondents’ desire for rational, logical behavior; discrepancy between the norms and values ​​existing in society and the real attitudes and motives of respondents; influence on the style of providing information by the subculture of respondents. There are four main ways of obtaining information using memory: association, fantasy, conceptualization and classification. Basic procedures of M. p.: sentence completion test; caricature method; painting interpretation method; method of didactic stories; method of pseudo-factual questions; game methods (M. S. Matskovsky, 2003). In conflictology, MPs make it possible to identify the true motives of the actions of participants in conflicts, and therefore they are a necessary and important element of many studies.

Projective methods

in developmental psychology) [lat. projectus - protruding, protruding forward] - methods for studying the personal and emotional characteristics of a child, based on the principle of projection formulated by Z. Freud. P. m. are widely used for practical and scientific purposes in studying the psychological characteristics of people of different ages, but they become especially important when working with children. Most other methods for studying personal characteristics (questionnaires, questionnaires, clinical interviews, etc.) are based on the subject’s self-report. These methods cannot be used when studying children who are not yet capable of reflecting on their own experiences and states. P. m. do not require such reflection. When working with children, both for diagnostic and psychotherapeutic purposes, projective games with special sets of toys (dolls, doll furniture, dishes, etc.) are often used. Children's analogues of “adult” projective tests have been developed. Thus, there is a children's version of the Rosenzweig test to study the reaction to frustration. The Children's Apperception Test CAT (Child Apperception Test; L. Bellak) was created - an analogue of the Thematic Apperception Test TAT; in it, the subject is asked to compose stories based on a standard set of pictures depicting animals in various situations that are potentially significant for the child (feeding, punishment, etc.). When studying children, projective drawing tests are widely used: “House - Tree - Person” (J.N. Buck), “Family Drawing” (W. Wolff; W. Hulse), “Dynamic Family Drawing” (R. Burns, S. Kaufman), “Non-existent animal” (M.Z. Dukarevich) and others. A.L. Wenger

These methods are based on the analysis of products of imagination and fantasy and are aimed at revealing the inner world of the individual, the world of his subjective experiences, thoughts, attitudes, and expectations. The priority in using the term “projection” to denote a special group of methods belongs to L. Franku, who identified a number of common features in some personality assessment techniques known at that time and very noticeably different from each other. Specific features of projective techniques:

♦ a relatively unstructured task that allows for an unlimited variety of possible answers;

♦ ambiguous, vague, unstructured stimuli, acting as a kind of “screen” onto which the subject can project his characteristic personality traits, problems, states;

♦ a global approach to assessing personality and, above all, to identifying its hidden, unconscious, veiled sides.

Arising, as a rule, in clinical settings, projective methods have been and remain primarily a tool of the clinical psychologist. Their theoretical justifications were influenced by psychoanalytic concepts and perceptual theories of personality.

Flaws.

1. insufficient objectivity of the projective technique,

2. inconsistency of many methods with the requirements usually imposed on psychodiagnostic tools.

3. lack or inadequacy of normative data, which leads to difficulties And subjectivity in the interpretation of individual results, when the psychologist is forced to trust his “clinical experience”.

4. Some projective methods lack objectivity in determining indicators; homogeneity and test-retest reliability coefficients are often unsatisfactory. Attempts to validate them suffer from methodological shortcomings, either due to poorly controlled experimental conditions, or due to the unreasonableness of statistical analysis, or due to incorrect sampling.

However, despite the noted disadvantages, the popularity and status of projective techniques remain virtually unchanged. First of all, this is explained by the fact that, according to psychodiagnosticians, they less susceptible to falsification on the part of the subject, than questionnaires, and therefore more suitable for personality diagnosis. This advantage of projective methods is due to the fact that their goal is usually disguised, And the subject cannot guess the ways of interpreting diagnostic indicators and their connection with certain manifestations of personality; therefore, he does not resort to disguise, distortion, or defensive reactions during the examination.

Projective structuring techniques.

H. Rorschach's inkblot technique .

This technique is one of the most popular. Developed by a Swiss psychiatrist G. Rorschach, it was first described in 1921.

The Rorschach technique uses 10 cards, each of which has a double-sided symmetrical spot printed on it. Five spots are done in only gray and black tones, two contain additional touches of bright red, and the remaining three are a combination of pastel colors. The tables are presented sequentially from 1 to 10 in the standard position indicated on the back. The presentation of Table 1 is accompanied by the instruction: “What is this, what might it look like?” The instructions will not be repeated in the future. After the end of spontaneous statements, the subject is encouraged to continue answering with the help of additional questions. In addition to verbatim recording of the subject's answers on each card, the experimenter notes the time of the response, involuntary remarks, emotional manifestations and other changes in the subject's behavior during the diagnostic session. After presenting all 10 cards, the experimenter, using a certain system, questions the subject regarding the parts and features of each of the spots for which associations arose. During the interview, the subject can also clarify or supplement his previous answers.

Interpretation indicators of the Rorschach technique are based on the relative number of responses falling into various categories, as well as on certain relationships and relationships between various categories. The directions of interpretation do not have a satisfactory theoretical basis, but are entirely determined by the empirical correlations of individual indicators with certain personality traits. For example, it is difficult to explain from a scientific point of view why the use of rare details in answers indicates uncertainty and anxiety, while the interpretation of a white background among extroverts indicates negativism.

The psychological conclusion based on the results of G. Rorschach’s technique usually describes the intellectual and affective spheres of the personality, as well as the features of its interpersonal interactions. When compiling it, the clinical psychologist also takes into account additional information received from external sources.

The main factor that complicates the interpretation of Rorschach scores is the total number of responses, known as response productivity. It has been empirically shown that the productivity of responses is directly related to the age, intellectual level and education of the individual. Although the technique described is believed to be applicable to individuals ranging in age from preschool to adulthood, normative data were originally obtained primarily from adult populations.

Introduction

Projective methods of personality research are probably one of the most complex and controversial areas of psychological psychodiagnostics. This applies to almost all aspects: the design of projective tests, their adaptation, testing and application, training of qualified specialists to work with them. The steady interest of psychologists in projective diagnostics has persisted for more than half a century. Various projective techniques are widely used in the practice of personality research in all areas of modern psychology. With their help, they not only gain any knowledge about the individual. They often serve as a working tool for testing certain theoretical positions. The importance of the place that projective techniques occupy in modern psychodiagnostics is evidenced by international congresses regularly held for many years, special scientific institutes and societies created in many countries, and periodicals published in different languages.

It is traditionally believed that the studies that anticipated the creation of projective tests were the works of W. Wundt and F. Galton. It is to them that the honor of first using the method of free (“verbal”) associations belongs. Also, psychologists such as K.G. worked in this direction. Jung, G. Kent and A. Rozanov, D. Rapaport, Hermann Rorschach, V.V. Abramov, J. Kelly, D. Crout, T. Kann. The concept of projection to denote a research method was introduced by L. Frank. Projective techniques are used to study the structure of motivation, the activity of personal characteristics, the perception of characterological features of social relationships, interpersonal and intrapersonal relationships. Purpose of the work: to characterize projective techniques as a method of psychodiagnostics, to consider their classifications and possibilities of application in applied and practical psychology.

Projective techniques as a method of psychodiagnostics

The first description of the projection process in a situation with stimuli that allow for different interpretations belongs to the famous American psychologist G. Murray (1938). He views projection as the natural tendency of people to act under the influence of their needs, interests, and entire mental organization. In fact, this is the first application of the concept of projection to psychological research. At the same time, G. Murray, who is well acquainted with psychoanalytic work, believed that defense mechanisms during the process of projection may or may not appear. Until this time, the theoretical concept of projection in the form in which it is applicable to the study of personality had not been formulated. But the real revolution was made by Hermann Rorschach’s book “Psychodiagnostics” (1921). It was in 1921 that a new stage began in the development of the experimental study of personality - the stage of its projective research.

Projective techniques (Latin projectio - throwing forward) are a set of techniques aimed at studying personality and developed within the framework of the projective diagnostic approach. The concept of projection to denote these techniques was first used by L. Frank (1939) and, despite repeated attempts to change their name, it has stuck and is generally accepted in psychological diagnostics . L. Frank was the first to formulate the principles of projective psychology and put forward three basic principles underlying the projective study of personality:

1. Projective methods are aimed at what is unique in the structure or organization of the individual. In contrast to traditional psychometric procedures, personality is considered as a system of interconnected processes, and not a list (set) of abilities or traits.

2. Personality in the projective approach is studied as a relatively stable system of dynamic processes organized on the basis of needs, emotions and individual experience.

3. This system of basic dynamic processes constantly, actively operates throughout the life of an individual, “forming, directing, distorting, changing and reshaping each situation into the system of the individual’s inner world.” Every new action, every emotional manifestation of an individual, his perceptions, feelings, statements, motor acts bear the imprint of his personality. This third and main theoretical position is usually called the "projective hypothesis".

Defining the specifics of the projective approach, L. Frank writes that this is a technique for studying personality, with the help of which the subject is placed in a situation, to which he reacts depending on the meaning of this situation for him, his thoughts and feelings. It is also emphasized that the stimuli used in projective techniques are not strictly unambiguous, but allow for different interpretations. A stimulus acquires meaning not simply because of its objective content, but primarily in connection with the personal meaning attached to it by the subject.

L. Frank does not consider projective techniques as a replacement for already known psychometric ones. The purpose of these techniques is to study the “idiomatic” internal sphere, which can be considered as a way of organizing life experience. According to the scientist, projective techniques successfully complement existing ones, allowing one to look into what is most deeply hidden and escapes when using traditional research techniques. The following features are common to all projective techniques:

1. Uncertainty, ambiguity of the stimuli used.

2. No restrictions in choosing an answer.

3. Lack of assessment of the test subjects’ answers as “correct” or “wrong”.

L. Frank also has priority in using the term “projection” to designate a special group of methods for studying personality. L. Frank considered the most significant feature of projective methods to be the uncertainty of stimulus conditions that allow the subject to project his way of seeing life, his thoughts and feelings. Uncertain, ambiguous (weakly structured) stimuli must be constructed, developed, supplemented, and interpreted by the subject. In accordance with the projective hypothesis, every emotional manifestation of an individual, his perceptions, feelings, statements, and motor acts bear the imprint of his personality. The personality manifests itself more vividly, the less stereotypical the stimulus situations that encourage it to be active.

In the late 30s - early 40s of the 20th century, projective methods were especially popular and became widespread. At the peak of their popularity, projective techniques supplanted traditional methods of psychodiagnostics. This was facilitated by the following circumstances: firstly, projective methods strived for a holistic description of personality, and not for any individual property or listing of personality traits. And secondly, they provided great scope for reflection for the psychologist himself, who, not limited to strict instructions, got the opportunity to interpret the identified results, focusing on a certain scientific school and his own experience.

From the point of view of psychoanalysis, projective techniques are aimed at diagnosing the causes of personality maladjustment, unconscious drives, conflicts and ways to resolve them (defense mechanisms). A condition for any projective research is the uncertainty of the test situation. This helps to relieve the pressure of reality; the individual in such conditions displays not conventional, but inherent modes of behavior. The process of interaction of a person with unstructured stimulus material is of the nature of projection, i.e. externalizing unconscious drives, instincts, conflicts, etc. Typically, projective techniques are also masked testing techniques, since the subject is rarely aware of the type of psychological interpretation that will be given to his answers. Thus, subjects are asked to interpret the content of plot pictures, complete unfinished sentences, give an interpretation of vague outlines, etc. In this group of techniques, answers to tasks also cannot be correct or incorrect ; A wide range of different solutions is possible. It is assumed that the nature of the subject’s answers is determined by the characteristics of his personality, which are “projected” in his answers. The purpose of projective techniques is relatively disguised, which reduces the ability of the subject to give answers that allow him to make the desired impression about himself.

Projective techniques are also characterized by a global approach to personality assessment. Attention is focused on the overall picture of the personality as such, rather than on measuring individual characteristics. Finally, projective techniques are considered by their proponents as the most effective procedures for discovering hidden, veiled or unconscious aspects of personality. Moreover, it is argued that the less structured the test, the more sensitive it is to such veiled material. This follows from the assumption that the less structured and unambiguous the stimuli, the less likely they are to evoke defensive reactions in the perceiver.

Projective techniques originated in clinical settings and remain primarily a clinician's tool. Some of these developed from therapeutic techniques (such as art therapy) used with the mentally ill. The theoretical constructions of projective techniques are influenced by psychoanalytic concepts. It should be noted that there is no need to evaluate specific techniques in terms of their theoretical orientation or history of origin. A technique may turn out to be practically useful, or empirically valuable, for reasons other than those put forward to justify its introduction for specialist use.

In accordance with the global approach characteristic of projective methods, not only the emotional, motivational and interpersonal characteristics of the individual are affected, but also some intellectual aspects of behavior. The latter include the general intellectual level, originality and style of solving problem situations. Certain adaptations of projective techniques are specifically designed to measure attitudes, and thus they seem to complement the techniques. It can be added that any psychological test, regardless of its purpose, can serve as a projective technique. For example, some clinicians use intelligence tests in this way.

In modern research (L.F. Burlachuk, 1997, L.F. Burlachuk and E.Yu. Korzhova, 1998), the theory of projective techniques is further developed, the diagnostic capabilities of already known ones are studied, and new ones are created. These studies, especially in the field of clinical psychology, deepen existing understanding of the impact of mental illness on personality and allow us to notice adequate therapeutic and rehabilitation measures. However, studies of normal individuals are still very limited; in most cases, a practicing psychologist cannot rely on normative data. Of methodological significance are the works that, unfortunately, ceased in the 80s, addressed to the study of the problem of the unconscious mind (L.F. Burlachuk, 1979; Yu.S. Savenko, 1979; E.T. Sokolova, 1979). Thus, projective techniques help researchers penetrate into personality traits that are difficult to objectify and elude when using traditional psychodiagnostic techniques.

Classification of projective techniques

Today there are many classifications of projective techniques for various reasons.

L. Frank was the first to develop a classification of projective techniques. This classification, despite the abundance of others, with the changes and additions proposed later, is today the most fully characterizing projective technique. The basis here is the nature of the response. Let's take a closer look at L. Frank's classification of projective techniques.

1) constitutive - structuring, designing stimuli, giving them meaning (for example, Rorschach test);

2) constructive - creating a meaningful whole from formed parts (for example, Mira test);

3) interpretative - interpretation of any event, situation (for example, Thematic Apperception Test);

4) cathartic - the implementation of gaming activities in specially organized conditions (for example, Psychodrama);

5) expressive - drawing on a free or given topic (for example, “House-Tree-Man” test);

6) impressive - preference for some stimuli (as the most desirable) over others (for example, Luscher color choice test);

7) additive - completing a sentence, story, story (for example, “Completing a sentence of a technique”).

Let us dwell in more detail on the characteristics of groups of projective techniques.

Constitutive. Techniques included in this category are characterized by a situation in which the subject is required to create a certain structure from unstructured material, that is, some amorphous material is offered to which it is necessary to give meaning. Examples of such techniques for completing a task include:

Unfinished sentences

Unfinished drawings

Incomplete sentences are a very popular technique used in a wide variety of studies. It may have some interpretations, for example, the respondent is asked to complete the sentence himself or choose from several proposed options. Unfinished drawing techniques such as the Wartegg test or VAT`60. Whether a Rorschach test is included in this category depends on how much “structure” a person is willing to see in the inkblots. And also modeling from plasticine or a similar substance is the type of activity that most quickly comes to mind. As another example, Frank cites the finger painting technique, carefully developed by Napoli, which claims to be a technique, although in fact it was not popular.

2. Constructive. Designed details are offered (figurines of people and animals, models of their homes, etc.), from which you need to create a meaningful whole and explain it. The scene test, for example, consists of miniature human figures, animal figures, trees and objects of everyday life. Subjects, usually children and teenagers, create different scenes from their lives (or those assigned to them by the experimenter), and based on certain features of these scenes and the story about them, conclusions are drawn about both the personality of their creator and the specifics of the social environment. The distinction between this category and the constitutive category is analogous to the distinction between “raw” and “processed” material. The latter, in the form of building blocks, mosaic pieces and the like, lends itself to ordering rather than modeling according to a template. This distinction may seem too subtle, but everyone determines the level of difficulty for themselves. An example that falls into this category would be the Drawing of a Person test or other forms of drawing tasks other than "free expression" according to one's own inclinations.

3. Interpretive methods - as is clear from the definition, the subject must interpret some stimulus based on his own considerations - TAT is a good illustration of this type of technique. The subject is offered table-pictures that depict relatively vague situations that allow for ambiguous interpretation. During the examination, the subject is written a short story in which it is necessary to indicate what led to the depicted situation, what is happening at the present time, what the characters are thinking, what the characters are feeling, how this situation will end. It is assumed that the subject identifies himself with the “hero” of the story, which makes it possible to reveal the inner world, his feelings, interests and motives [ibid., P.152].

4. Cathartic. It is proposed to carry out gaming activities in specially organized conditions. For example, psychodrama in the form of an improvised theatrical performance allows the subject not only to react affectively (game catharsis) - and thereby achieve a therapeutic effect - but also gives the researcher the opportunity to discover conflicts, problems, and other personally rich products that are externalized. Here we see a shift in emphasis from percentage to result. Gaming techniques involve the imagination of the subject, and therefore are a typical example of this category.

5. Expressive. Analysis of handwriting, features of speech communication. The subject carries out visual activities, drawing on a free or given topic, for example, the “House-Tree-Man” technique. Based on the drawing, conclusions are drawn about the affective sphere of the personality, the level of psychosexual development and other characteristics.

6. Impressive. These methods are based on studying the results of choosing stimuli from a number of proposed ones. The subject selects the most desirable, preferred stimuli. For example, the Luscher test, consisting of 8 colored squares. All the squares are presented with a request to choose the most pleasant one. The procedure is repeated with the remaining squares until a row is finally formed in which the colors are arranged according to their attractiveness. The psychological interpretation comes from the symbolic meaning of color. Virtually any objects of living and inanimate nature can act as stimuli.

7.Additive. The subject is required to complete a beginning sentence, story, or story. These techniques are designed to diagnose a variety of personal variables, from the motives of certain actions to attitudes towards sex education for young people.

All of these methods, according to Frank, are united by the ability to reflect on the screen the most significant aspects of personality in their interdependence and integrity of functioning. These methods are also characterized by a common formal structure and similarity in the strategy of the projective experiment: the behavior of the research psychologist, the selection of stimulus material, and the formulation of diagnostic tasks.

In the literature on psychometric tests and in the literature on projective techniques, other classifications of methods can be found. The above classification most fully covers the range of projective techniques.

1. Methods of addition. Stimulus material: a set of stimulus words. The respondent is required to name the words that “come to mind” in connection with the word he heard (K. G. Jung’s association test).

A set of unfinished sentences or an unfinished story that requires completion (“Unfinished Sentences”).

A question that requires a certain number of answers (“Who Am I?”).

2. Interpretation techniques. Stimulus material - a set of pictures, photographs. The respondent is required to compose a story (TAT, SAT) based on the proposed pictures; answer questions about the proposed situations in the pictures (Rozensweig Frustration Test, Gilles Test); select pleasant-unpleasant pictures-photographs (Sondi Test).

3. Structuring techniques. Low-structured stimulus material (Interpretation of random forms by G. Rorschach).

4. Methods for studying expression (analysis of handwriting, features of speech behavior).

5. Methods for studying creative products. The subject of interpretation is the drawing that the respondent draws (“House. Tree. Man”, “Tree”, “Man”, “Two Houses”, “Drawing of a Family”, “Pictogram”, “Self-Portrait”, “Picture of the World”, “Free drawing", "Non-existent animal.

G.M. Proshansky tried to trace all these differences in a three-stage scheme for analyzing projective techniques. A brief summary of this three-stage classification is as follows: Stimuli: a) verbal; b) visual; c) specific; d) other modalities; Answer: a) associative; b) interpretive; c) manipulative; d) free choice; Purpose: a) description; b) diagnostics; c) therapy. The peculiarity of this classification is that the last point of each category falls out of the general order or is the opposite of other points.

Possibilities of projective techniques

Modern projective techniques, on the one hand, require little time spent on implementation, on the other hand, they are focused on identifying deep-seated experiences and relationships. In-depth diagnostics using projective techniques (Sondi, Luscher, etc.) are intended to identify hidden or concealed motives, relationships, the structure of consciousness and unconscious experiences. Projective techniques make it possible to find out what a person really thinks and feels. In career counseling, diagnostic methods using projective techniques can be used to determine the true motives for choosing a profession, interests and hobbies, attitudes towards oneself and other people, leading life values, plans and ideas about the future, the content of worries, sources of fears, problems, repressed complexes, etc. e. Computer projective methods of color and portrait selection combine the results of express diagnostics and in-depth diagnostics, which makes them indispensable in practical work. All projective techniques are united by the ability to reflect on the screen the most significant aspects of the personality in their interdependence and integrity of functioning. These methods are also characterized by a common formal structure and similarity in the strategy of the projective experiment: the behavior of the research psychologist, the selection of stimulus material, and the formulation of diagnostic tasks. It is customary to talk about the following distinctive features of projective techniques: 1) the so-called uncertainty of the stimulus material or instructions for the task, due to which the subject has relative freedom in choosing an answer or behavioral tactics; 2) the subject’s activity takes place in an atmosphere of goodwill and in the complete absence of an evaluative attitude from the outside experimenter. This point, as well as the fact that the subject usually does not know what is diagnostically significant in his answers, leads to a maximum projection of the personality, not limited by social norms and assessments;

3) projective techniques do not measure this or that mental function, but a kind of personality mode in its relationship with the social environment. The formal characteristics of projective techniques, while not providing grounds for unambiguously correlating them with any specific theoretical scheme, nevertheless determine a special research strategy. First of all, this concerns the behavior of the experimenter and the subject: the experimenter, from a neutral recorder of the subject’s answers, must become his partner, a friendly and understanding interlocutor; the subject in such a situation (even in the absence of a specially formulated psychotherapeutic task) experiences a kind of “catharsis.” It goes without saying that the success of projective research largely depends on the personality of the experimenter, his ability to win over the subject and a number of other factors that arise in such communication. Main the principles of projective research were formed in the struggle, on the one hand, with traditional experimental psychology, which “sterilized” the experimental conditions in order to achieve maximum objectivity, and on the other hand, with test psychometric studies that ignored individual personality characteristics and ways to achieve certain results. In a certain sense, the principle of constructing a projective experiment is close to the principle of “functional test”, developed in Russian psychology, according to which the experiment models “not only the mental operations of the patient, but also his personal attitude.” Projective methods are now widespread, their number is large and continues to increase. However, they continue to be a favorite target for criticism. There is a generally accepted opinion about the lack of objectivity of the projective technique, about the inconsistency of many techniques with the requirements usually imposed on psychodiagnostic tools. So A. Anastasi notes that from the point of view of psychometrics, they “overwhelmingly look pathetic.” Among their shortcomings, they usually see the absence or inadequacy of normative data, which leads to difficulties and subjectivity in the interpretation of individual results, when the psychologist is forced to trust his “clinical experience.” Another drawback is that some projective methods lack objectivity in determining indicators; homogeneity and test-retest reliability coefficients are often unsatisfactory. Attempts to validate them suffer from methodological shortcomings, either due to poorly controlled experimental conditions, or due to the unreasonableness of statistical analysis, or due to incorrect sampling. As A. Anastasi points out, the number of works that have failed to prove any validity of projective techniques such as Rorschach's Draw a Person and Inkblots is truly impressive.

However, despite the noted disadvantages, the popularity and status of projective techniques remain virtually unchanged. This is primarily explained by the fact that, according to psychodiagnosticians, they are less susceptible to falsification on the part of the subject than questionnaires, and therefore are more suitable for diagnosing personality. This advantage of projective methods is due to the fact that their goal is usually disguised, and the subject cannot guess how to interpret diagnostic indicators and their connection with certain manifestations of personality; therefore, he does not resort to disguise, distortion, or defensive reactions during examination. At the same time, some psychologists (L. Kaplan, L. Cronbach) are increasingly considering projective techniques as clinical tools that can serve as an additional high-quality means of conducting dialogue with the patient being examined.

Projective methods can also be used as an excellent tool in research on personality psychology: instead of lamenting the discrepancy between fantasy and real behavior, we should study them and analyze fantasies in the light of the subject's present and past behavior. Indeed, in reality, a person realizes his fantasies and needs through adaptation, compromise and settlement in accordance with the requirements of the surrounding reality.

In addition, projective methods are effective in establishing contact with the subject , in working with young children. They, as a rule, arouse interest on the part of the subject, who is involved in their implementation.

Conclusion

projective technique psychodiagnostics

The emergence of a projective approach to personality diagnosis is an important stage in the development of psychodiagnostics, since methods appear that are qualitatively different from traditional ones. Projective techniques are techniques based on the phenomenon of projection. They are intended to study those deep individual personality characteristics that are least accessible to direct observation or questioning. The specificity of the projective method lies in its focus on identifying, first of all, subjective conflict relations and their representation in the individual consciousness in the form of “personal meanings” or “significant experiences”.

The most important distinctive feature of projective techniques is that they use vague or weakly structured stimuli that create the most optimal conditions for the manifestation of a person’s inner world. However, studies aimed at analyzing the role of the stimulus in the projective technique show that it is a mistake to assume that each reaction of the subject is personally determined, since the objective parameters of the stimuli are directly involved in the formation of responses. Despite this, in the modern world there is increasing interest in projective techniques as one of the most important psychological tools for cognition of personality.

Literature

1. Anastasi, A., Urbina, S. Psychological testing / Transl. from English - St. Petersburg: Peter, 2001. - 688 p.

2. Burlachuk, L.F. Introduction to Projective Psychology. - Kyiv: Vist-S, 1997. – 128 p.

3. Burlachuk, L.F. . Psychodiagnostics. Textbook for universities / Burlachuk Leonid Fokich. - St. Petersburg: Peter, 2006. - 351 p.: ill. - (Textbook of the new century).

4. Burlachuk, L.F., Morozov, S.M. Dictionary-reference book on psychodiagnostics - St. Petersburg: Peter Kom, 1999. - 528 pp.: (Series “Masters of Psychology”)

5. Projective psychology: Transl. from English - M.: April-Press, EKSMO-Press Publishing House, 2000. – 318 p..

6. Psychological diagnostics: a textbook for university students / ed. M.K. Akimova, K.M. Gurevich. -3rd ed., revised. and additional... -SPb. [and others]: Peter, 2003. -650 pp., p.: tab. - (Textbook for universities)

7. Sokolova, E.T. Projective methods of personality research. - M.: MSU, 1980. - 150 p.

8. Shapar, V.B., Shapar, O.V. Practical psychology. Projective techniques. / V.B. Shapar, O.V. Shapar. - Rostov n/d: Phoenix, 2006. - 480 p. (Psychological Faculty).