rorschach responses of achieving and nonachieving college students of high ability

RORSCHACH RESPONSES OF ACHIEVING AND NONACHIEVING COLLEGE STUDENTS OF H I G H ABILITY’

BERNARD STEINZOR, U. S. Amy

intelligent college students fail to succeed in school studies is a

a portion of the better intellectual material in a school population should fail is recognized as a definite social loss. This study attempts to discover some sug- gestive reasons which might clarify the interrelationships of personality qualities, aside from high intelligence, which make for college achievement or failure.

Many techniques have been used in studies of school failure, including case histories, teacher’s reports on personality, unstandardized rating scales and questionnaires, interviews, school behavior records, life histories, and the standard paper and pencil tests. Harris (4), in reviewing the literature on the subject, finds in general, the results contradict each other. Many of the studies suffer because the subject groups are heterogeneous, intelligence is not held constant, and no attempt is made to present the results in the form of statistical reliabili- ties. Conklin (2) using two groups of highly intelligent high school pupils, one group doing well and the other poorly, makes by far the most extensive study of failure in school. She finds that her results do not distinguish the groups in such categories as interest, temperament, life experience, home environment, physical and mental traits, and intellectual performance on psychological tests. Her con- clusion is that the essence of behavior lies not in single symptoms, but in the dynamic interaction of basic personality traits. Margulies (8), using the Ror- schach Ink Blot “Psychodiagnostik,” which attempts to measure basic personality factors and their interrelationships, investigates junior high school pupils having a mean IQ of 124. Her achieving and nonachieving groups were equated for IQ, age, sex, socioeconomic status, parent’s birthplace, residence in New York City, religion, and language in the home. She finds some marked statistical differences in some of the Rorschach categories. These are interpreted to show that unsuccessful students have more signs of emotional disturbances in their capacity to establish personal relationships and that they are more stereotyped in their thinking. Achievers show more harmony between their interests in abstract thinking and creative capacities, have more Rorschach signs of good adjustment and show a more careful awareness of the outer environment.

Such results encouraged the further use of the Rorschach for investigating this problem. Whereas previous research techniques have been unable to obtain any clear-cut differences, the Rorschach method was able to distinguish intelligent achieving and nonachieving groups. This may be so because of two reasons. The Rorschach analysis is given in structural concepts rather than in terms of behavior. Psychologists have noted that very similar types of behavior may have different causes and basically the same kind of personality factor gives expres-

at the Psychological Clinic ofOhio State University.

WHY problem ’ of great concern to parents, teachers, and society in general. That

1 A condensation of a thesis on research done under the supervision of Professor Carl R. Rogers

494

BERNARD STEINZOR 495

sion to different forms of behavior. Kurt Lewin uses the terms “genotype” and “phenotype” to differentiate structural and behavioral personality factors re- spectively. Behavioral studies present a confused and clouded picture since the real and basic meaning of behavior is not revealed. The Rorschach method shows the basic personality structure which helps make behavior understandable.

This method also presents a picture of the interrelationship of personality factors. No one Rorschach factor, for example, has meaning by itself; each derives its meaning from its relationship to others. The value of a specific feature varies according to the constellation in which it appears. A diagnostic approach which permits personality description in terms of interrelationships might logically be concluded to reveal hitherto undisclosed differences between the achiever and the nonachiever. Recent psychological thought has pointed to the primacy of relationships as against isolated traits.

SELECTION OF SUBJECTS The criterion for high ability was taken to be a percentile score of 8 5 or better

on the Ohio State University Psychological Examination. All in the achieving group, numbering fifteen, and having a mean O.S.P.E. centile of 94.0 had a point- hour-ratio of 3.20 or better. The average was 3.62 where a grade of A is given a value of 4, B is 3, and so on. The nonachievers, numbering fifteen, with a mean O.S.P.E. centile of 91.3, had a grade index of 1.70 or less with a mean of 1.60. A student had to have a cumulative grade index of a t least 1.70 a t the end of six quarters in order to matriculate. The criterion for failure was, therefore, deemed adequate.

All thirty subjects were selected from the College of Arts on a voluntary basis. The curriculum in this ’college is fairly common in prescribing the sciences. Only males were chosen since there is evidence that sex differences are obtained in Rorschach records. Seniors or students in attendance less than two complete aca- demic quarters were not included in the study. Achievers averaged 4.7 completed quarters and the nonachiever saveraged 4.4. The mean ages were 19 years 1 1

months for the achievers, and 21 years 2 months for the nonachievers. Answers to items in a brief questionnaire were obtained from each student so

that the groups might be more adequately described. Both groups were equated in the mean hours of study per week, income and occupation of father, number of children in family, American nativity of parents, religion, and number living in cities of 50,000 population or more. Some interesting group differences were as follows. Though both groups spent an equal number of hours in study, only one achiever as against ten nonachievers reported having difficulty concentrating while studying. The greater study efficiency of the achievers is also shown by the fact that while attending school eight of them reported that they worked, while three nonachievers reported working after school hours.

The technique used in administering and evaluating the Rorschach test is that described by Klopfer (6). The analysis and scoring followed his method for determining the location, determinants, and the content of each response.

496 RORSCHACH TESTS OF SUCCEEDING A N D FAILING STUDENTS

RESULTS A N D DISCUSSION The “t” statistic is one of the many methods developed for the treatment of

small samples. The percentage of significance of the critical ratios was obtained from Table 3 in Lindquist (7) which gives a clear account of the underlying theory and the necessary formulae. In this study, the number of degrees of freedom is 28. A ratio which is significant a t the I per cent level or less is a conservative esti- mate of real significance of a difference.

Tables 1-5 give the results obtained in single Rorschach categories for the achievers, nonachievers, and groups combined. Discussion of the meaning of the results follow each table. The interpretation of the various categories is the standard meaning given to such factors by Rorschach workers, especially Klopfer and Kelly (6). A category, of course, gains and changes its meaning through clinical validation. In the same sense, Rorschach factors derive part of their interpreta-

18.67 8.19 2.80

9-37 11.67’ 7.04: 1 .44 45.17’ 28.31 1 . 3 5

10.17‘ 1 1 . 4 1 ’ 1.47’

1 21.20’ 11.33’ .38*

Responses Range Time R/T Reaction Time

Achromatic Reaction Time

Chromatic

Combined

M (I

15.40 14.65

14.85‘ 8.45:

17.30’ 11.16’

20.30’ 12.72’

39.60’ 23.31

TABLE 1 Responses and Timet

Achievers N-Achievers D

M

32.13 16.75

17.03’ 9.40: 17-68

33.93’ 15.98

14.33’ 10.73’

19.40’ 14.63’

- __

% Sig.

< I

16 19

16

70 - t All values in this and following tables were computed directly from the raw data. * In this and Tables 2 and 4 it indicates that mean of achievers is less than mean of nonachievers.

tion from the characteristics of the normative groups. The fact remains, however, that no matter what explanation we may use in describing a difference between two groups, a difference does exist.

Responses Table I shows that the numerical difference in the number of responses in favor

of the achievers is by any standard definitely significant. The number of responses has generally not been used as an important item for interpretation. Klopfer (6 ) thinks that as long as an optimal number of responses is given (assumed to be between 20 and 40) the quality of the individual response is of greater importance for evaluation. However, the difference found in the present groups may indicate that the number of responses should be used as an aid for interpretation. I n this case the reason for the difference may be that the achievers have the ability to produce more quantitatively, have a greater number of associations a t their command, and can, therefore, offer more in a particular situation. Success in col-

W W% D D% d d% Dd+S Dd+S%

Combined Achievers N-Achievers D - %

M C M 0 M C CD Sip. ~-

7.99 4.61 8 . 2 0 5 . 1 5 7.27 3.39 .58 56 30.27 19.69 29.20 19.60 41.33 19.76 1.69% 10

5 2 . ~ 0 1 1 . 3 2 54.73 3.88 50.27 15.48 1.08 30 1 .84 2.56 2.80 3 . 1 2 .87 1 . 3 2 2.20 4 6 . 1 7 8.59 8 .07 9.36 4.17 7,34 1 .24 23

3 1.24 2 .22 2 .60 2.71 .87 1 . 1 3 2 .29

6.14 7.28 8 . 0 7 8.84 4 .20 4 . 8 6 1 1 . 4 9 18

14.07 10.59 18.47 1 1 . 6 1 9.67 5.89 2.53 7


lege may demand a t least quantity, if not quality. However, this difference will become more meaningful in the discussion of the qualitative scoring categories. It must be emphasized that the nature of the Rorschach method is such that the number of responses is to a large extent the function of the individual’s response to and utilization of the various qualities in the blots such as form, shading, and color.

Though the difference of means in R / T is not significant, the achievers tend to produce their material more quickly. The reaction time to the achromatic cards, I, IV, V, VI, VII, and the partially chromatic and chromatic cards does not yield significant differences.

W and W%. As shown in Table 2, the mean difference in the number of whole responses is certainly not significant. The percentage of whole responses in which

TABLE 2 Aueragc Number of Location Cafcgories

the whole blot is utilized in giving a response approaches significance. But since there is greater significance in W% it means that the achiever, though capable of producing as many whole responses as the nonachiever, is proportionately less inclined to manifest this form of mental approach. W, according to the Rorschach literature, represents abstract forms of thinking and the higher forms of mental activity. The proportion of W responses in both groups is sufficiently high to indicate an ability to work in abstract realms. The achiever, on the one hand, has a normal proportion of whole responses while the nonachiever tends to overem- phasize the W approach.

D, D%, d, d%. The difference between the groups in number of responses is partly a result of the practically significant differences in the number of large details (D) and small details (d) used as location for a response. The majority of their productions are interpreted as being of a concrete and practical nature. The D response has been taken to mean an ability to recognize facts on the level of everyday reality. The D% difference is not reliable; however, on the basis of this interpretation of a large detail response, the nonachiever does not seem to have enough recognition of the facts and problems which exist in day to day life. They do not have enough “common sense” to recognize the formal and conventional

498 RORSCHACH TESTS OF SUCCEEDING AND FAILING STUDENTS

facts. Also, in using reliably less d's, they seem to lack a critical capacity to discern the smaller facts which are conspicuous enough to attract attention easily.

Nonachievers, then, seem to lack a combination of sufficient common sense and a critical attitude. Furthermore, in the use of unusual areas, symbolized by Dd or tiny and rare detail and S or white space detail, another difference in attitude might also be seen to exist. The achievers seem to have enough elasticity to observe and recognize the less obvious but a t the same time interesting body of facts, and also occasionally to see their problems from an unusual angle (S). The results on W and D and d may also suggest that the nonachievers are less mature in that they have not tempered their interest in higher forms of mental activity (W) in accordance with the demands of reality (D and d).

Determinants The features of the ink blot the individual uses for his responses offers most for

a Rorschach diagnosis of personal adjustment, both to one's inner promptings TABLE 3

Average Number of Determinants

Achievers N-Achievers

M U M LT

1.67 3.51 1.60 1.76 4 . 4 0 1.80 3.33 2.38

.67 1 . 1 1 .47 .23

.20 .40 .33 .73

.53 1 .13 . I 3 .35 12.20 7 .98 7 .47 4.31 37 .60 15.47 41 .60 19.86 5.20 3 . 5 1 2 .27 1.87 .80 .94 .47 .64

2.80 2 . 1 4 1 .47 1 . 9 9 1 . 4 7 1 . 8 1 .53 .95

.47 . .71 .33 .49 3 . 5 7 2 .69 1 .73 1 . 9 6

M FM m K FK F F% Fc C' FC CF C Sum C

D

LTD

1.06 1.37

-

.69 '.74* 1.31 1.20

2.86

1.02

1.77 .28

2 . 2 4

.61"

.36

Corn bined

M LT

2 . 1 4 1 . 7 8 3.87 2 . 3 4

.57 .80 ,27 .so .32 .84

9 . 8 4 7 .09 39 .60 1 9 . 1 9

3 . 7 4 3.46 .64 . 8 1

2 . 1 4 2 . 1 4 1.00 1.13

.40 . 5 1 2 . 6 5 2 . 4 7

- ~

% Sip.

30 19 50 I 0 20

5 5'

< I

70 31 9

78 3

and to the stimuli that come from without. The kind of determinants used are of greatest importance in judging whether he has well-developed creative abilities, whether situations which are emotionally toned are responded to in an adjusted way or whether their existence is denied.

M, FM, m. The categories, M for human movement, FM for animal movement, and m for inanimate movement represent the use of kinaesthesis in determining a response. Table 3 shows that the significance of the differences of these categories is very low. The achievers tend to give more M responses, sug- gesting that they have more creative abilities and a richer inner life. Either that, or else they are denying their creative urges to a lesser extent than the nonachievers. On the whole, it is surprising that with such select college groups, so few human inovement responses are given. Klopfer (6) reports that the norms in


the Rorschach literature indicate a t least 3 to 5 M’s for superior adults. Four of our achievers and six nonachievers give no human movement responses. Ob- viously, these particular students are not feebleminded. The feebleminded rarely have human movement responses (I) . This absence of M’s may, therefore, be more adequately interpreted as a repression of the creative ideas.

There is a greater expression of inner personal energy in the larger number of animal movement responses given by both groups. An F M has been taken to represent the influence of the more instinctive and less mature layers of the personality. Children are quite free in seeing animals in action but usually do not see humans doing something. According to Klopfer, a predominance of F M over M is said to indicate a degree of immaturity because the individual has not yet developed his more basic promptings into more personally useful channels. Both groups reveal this kind of immaturity and this observation confirms the general impression that college students are not fully mature individuals. The difference between the groups in the number of animal movement responses is not reliable though the tendency is for achievers to have a greater fund of basic energy from which they may be able to develop more creativeness by directing their promptings in a definite direction.

When a response represents inanimate forces, it is symbolized by m. They are believed to represent conflicts which the person feels originate primarily within himself. This factor does not clarify the understanding of group differences, since the majority of both groups did not give any m’s.

A score of K is given when the shading in the blot is used to give an effect of diffusion or haziness. Klopfer and other Rorschach workers have felt that these physical qualities reflect corresponding qualities of the inner life caused by free floating anxiety. An F K response may be an attempt to mitigate these anxieties by introspection. Few subjects manifest any of these types of responses. I t can be said that if there is a difference in the amount of anxiety between the groups, the Rorschach test has failed to measure it.

F and F%. When nothing but the shapes in the blot are used in giving a response it is scored F. A large number of F responses has been taken to mean the use of a large degree of intellectual control over one’s reactions. Constriction or coarctation are Rorschach terms for a predominant use of form in giving a response. Klopfer says that when the F% goes above so, the individual begins to present a picture of a constricted personality which is repressing spontaneity of expression. Neurotics have often presented an F% greater than 60 or 70. On the average, the experimental groups do not show any constrictive tendencies and there is no group difference in Fa/, that is reliable. However, a fairly significant difference is found in number of form responses. As with the number of large detail responses, this result may contribute to the difference in number of R’s. Achievers seem to have ability to see more ideas from an impersonal and intellectual point of view.

Fc. According to Klopfer, the use of shading to give a response using the sur- f a c e s texture has apparently something to do with touch feeling. Hertz ( 5 ) says


that when there is a union of control (F) and shading sensation (c) to give an Fc response, the individual shows a careful awareness of things and events that are occurring in his environment. This awareness may be called tact in that it shows a sensitivity to personal relationships and also indicates an ability to develop relationships with other people. Those who can respond in a fair degree to texture also have developed the capacities which serve as shock absorbers of stimuli (8). One may become disturbed by his personal relationships but if he shows some Fc’s, it will indicate that he has functions he can utilize as a cushion to pro- tect himself from being overwhelmed.

The difference in number of Fc’s is very reliable. Achievers, on this basis, seem to show a greater degree of consideration of environmental stimuli. In having more of these “shock absorbing” qualities, they will probably be able to recover balance more successfully, if upset in an encounter with the environment. In such an instance, they will not be so personally overwhelmed that they cannot go on to make further contacts with the environment. The nonachiever seems to lack this capacity.

C’. The use of black, grey, or white of the surface is scored C’. This kind of response, as borne out by the present results, is relatively rare. Bbth groups show very few of these responses and are not a t all distinguished by the frequency of this determinant.

Color All Rorschach workers have accepted the idea that color responses are signifi-

cant in determining the individual’s emotional tieup with the outer environment. How he reacts to the bright colors of the blots will closely reflect his general emotional attitude to outer reality.

The three types of color responses are: I ) FC, in which form and color are fused and indicates that the rational element controls the emotional reaction. 2) C F which symbolizes the fact that the color element is predominant and it has been taken to represent the more impulsive and aggressive reaction to emotional stimuli. 3 ) C, symbolizing a reaction only to the color aspects of the cards and interpreted to mean that all rational control has been destroyed in the emotional reaction. The total reaction to color is expressed in Sum C.* I t may be an indicator of good personality adjustment only in the sense that it is probable that the person who responds most often to emotional stimulation will have more opportunity for making good emotional adjustments.

Sum C yields the most significant difference between the groups in the color area. Achievers seem to have a greater tieup with the outside world, not con- sidering whether their reactions are of the adjusted or impulsive kind. There is a slight tendency for them to have more emotionally adjusted reactions in giving more FC responses. They also have more CF’s but this is not too serious a factor for indicating maladjustment. Not only can C F responses be converted to FC since the recognition of color is present, but the achievers have more FC’s than

FC+zCF+3C % S u m C = 2


CF’s. The nonachievers also reveal this relationship which is important in con- sidering social adjustment. Comparing these relationships with that existing between M and FM, it is seen that college students seem to be more socially mature and adjusted than personally adjusted.

The difference in Sum C also contributes in part to the significant difference in number of responses. The limited affectivity of the nonachievers makes for limited total productivity. However, this is not the only indication of a lack of affectivity among the nonachievers, but there is some evidence that they repress their emotional life to some extent. The percentage of responses to Cards VIII, IX, and X is taken to indicate the amount of interest the person has in his outer life. The normal percentage is about 33 per cent. Both groups show a more than normal interest in color by averaging about 37 per cent on the last three cards (Table 5). However, despite this seeming desire to respond to emotionally-toned situations, the nonachievers show little actual color reactivity.

In summary, the main findings regarding the differences between the groups revealed in the determinants, show that success in college is correlated with an ability to make deeper personal contacts and also to a greater sensitivity and awareness of outer reality.

Content of Responses A+Ad%. In normal records animal and animal details are most frequently

obtained. Since the cards lend themselves to the seeing of animal figures, a person requires little constructive or imaginative effort to give animal responses. One that gives a large proportion of such associations, 50 per cent or more, is said to have stereotyped mental processes. This may also express itself in other content categories.

TABLE 4 Averages in Conrent Responses

Combined Achievers N-Achievers D Ihl 38.47 10.62 5.47 1.64 19.53 7.64

10.13 3.20

A+Ad% P

47.13 14.14 1.90. 7 4.40 2.13 1.54 15 15.07 16.89 1.16‘ 28

7.40 2.59 2.56 i

i% Content

Categories

42.80 12.87 4.94 1.95 22.30 ir.go

8.77 3.18

Table 4 shows that difference in A+Ad% between the experimental groups approaches statistical significance. Nonachievers have a mean value of almost 50 per cent animal responses. This may mean that they are less variable in their thought processes than are achievers. This percentage is often found to be associ- ated with the number of large details (D). Though nonachievers see few D’s, showing a lack of awareness of the real and concrete, they see a large proportion of animals. This fact emphasizes the apparent narrowness of thought processes of the nonachiever. The few practical everyday facts he does recognize usually have only one meaning to him.


P and P%. Popular responses are those which appear in 20 per cent of the records. Normally the P% should be about 20. This is interpreted to mean that the individual has the ability to think as others do. The achievers see absolutely more popular responses but proportionately have fewer such associations. This relationship supports the trend found in the percentage of animal responses. One of the nonachievers had a P% of 40 and another of 70, while not one of the achievers had a P% that exceeded 32.

Content Categories. Besides the number of responses, another indicator of the range of ideas is the number of content categories. Achievers have a wider range of ideas (R, A+Ad%) and also a wider range of interests as shown by the almost significantly greater number of categories into which their ideas group themselves. This feature has seldom been used statistically by Rorschach workers. Further research on special groups might also reveal other interpretively important categories.

Ratio of Factors. The interpretation of Rorschach records depends to a large extent on the relationships between factors and the ratio of one type of response to another. TABLE 5

Ratio of Factors

% Combined Achievers i N-Achievers D

I M V I M

M/Sum C* FM+m/Fc+c

+C‘* VIII,IX,X% W/M*

- - .I5 - .91 -

.81 - 1.35 -

- -

- - - - 37.40 13.51 37.73 1 0 . 5 2 37.07 16 .35 . X I >go

- - 3 . 0 7 - 4 . 5 4 - - -

* Calculated from the means of the respective categories.

Introvert-Extravert Configurations.3 An assumption of the Rorschach test is that reactions of humans are stimulated from within as well as from without. Klopfer and others list three ratios which give a picture of the distribution of the life energies. These are: I) M/Sum C; 2) FM+m/Fc+c+C’; 3) VIII, IX, X%. These make up what has been called the basic-personality configuration or Erlebnistyp .

The achievers show a consistency in their three ratios which are all extraverted. When an individual record shows three ratios all in the same direction, there is usually little doubt as to the basic personality constellation. The nonachievers, on the other hand, show a shift in the direction of the ratios. Their percentage of responses to the last three cards point to extravertial tendencies, the ratio of M to Sum C is almost ambivert, and that of FM+m to Fc+c+C’ is definitely in- troverted. Whatever the basic tendencies of the nonachievers, and they might be presumed to be extravert, a picture of conflict seems to show itself in the changing emphasis of the ratios. The nonachiever seems to be forcing his reactions in a direction not consonant with his basic tendencies or else he may be denying these

* Ambivert ratio is I , Extravert is less than I , and Introvert more than I .

BERN.ARD STEINZOR 503

tendencies. His ratios are analogous to what has been found in the so-called “In- troversial Swing.” This phenomenon occurs in adolescents who shy away from full reactivity to an outer reality which has suddenly gained new meanings for them.

W/M. This proportion purports to give a picture of how well-established is the bond between the person’s inner life, mental activity, and useful productivity. Individuals who have an excess of W’s over M’s, about four or five times as much or more, tend not to be making the best use of their creative capacities? Such individuals tend to be very one-sided in their intellectual achievements or’ else strive to reach an intellectual level for which they do not have the creative ability. On the other hand, individuals having as many or more M’s as W’s seem to be so preoccupied with their own creative processes that they are not able to use these capacities for actual creations. The optimum ratio for adults has been taken to be about two W’s for every M.

The present groups both have a predominance of W’s over M’s. However, nonachievers seem to be overreaching themselves to a greater extent than the achievers who are keeping their productivity, in terms of W, more in line with their capacity to produce, in terms of M. The nonachiever may have a poorer evaluation of his capabilities and seems to be less realistic in his conception of what he can do.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Two groups, each of fifteen male students in the College of Arts, were selected as subjects. All had an 85th centile or better on the Ohio State Psychological Examination. One group, doing well in school, had a B+ average and the other group doing poor work had a C- average. The groups were fairly well equated for such variables as age, completed quarters in school, income of father, number of children in the family, birthplace of parents, urban residence, religion, dates per week, and number of study hours per week.

The study attempted to discover if there were any structural differences in personality between the groups as measured by the Rorschach Ink Blot test.

Reports by subjects on their activities showed the following divergent trends: I ) Nonachievers, on the average, are employed fewer hours while attending

school. In spite of the greater work load, achievers are doing well. 2) Nonachievers seemed to be more inefficient in use of study time. Ten report

having trouble in concentrating. Only one achiever reports the same. Resulting differences in single categories of the Rorschach were generally in

the direction of what might be expected from groups differing in degree of adjustment. Nonachievers had fewer signs of good adjustment. The most significant results for achievers were as follows:

I ) They gave more responses to the cards. This may mean that they can produce more in a purely quantitative sense.

2) There are more large detail responses. They seem to be more in contact with and able to recognize the concrete, practical, and everyday facts of life.

to be from 2-4, depending on age, and W s from 6-8. See Klopfer (6) and Vernon (10).

-

4 Group norms on bright young children and normal adults indicate the average number of M’s


3) They have many more small and unusual detail responses. According to the Rorschach interpretation they would have a greater critical ability to discern the smaller and less obvious though important facts.

4) They present many more responses to surface texture controlled by form (Fc). It may be interpreted that they are more sensitive to and more aware of their environment. I n having these shock absorbing qualities in more abundance they may be better equipped to enter into personal relationships.

5) There are more responses in which they respond to bright color. On the basis of the Rorschach interpretation of the use of color they seem to be more respon- sive to emotional stimulation from the outer environment. This would seem to indicate that they are probably better adjusted socially.

6) They give more responses which utilize only the forms of the blots. They thus seem to show an ability to use their intellectual control more frequently than the nonachievers.

7) They present more content categories; thus seem to show a much wider range of interests which probably makes for a fuller and less monotonous kind of life.

8) They show a smaller percentage of animal responses; seem to be less stereotyped in their thinking.

On the whole, nonachievers gave indications, as measured by the Rorschach test, of being a less well-adjusted group. Though there were individuals in the successful group who showed Rorschach signs of severe maladjustment, it is expected that the personally and socially better adjusted individual will do more satisfactory school work.

The present study has borne out many of the results found by Margulies (8). The test throws some light on the problem of failure in college. This is a recom- mendation for the further use of the test as a research tool.

BIBLIOGRAPHY I . BECK, SAMUEL J. The Rorschach Test as Applied to a Feebleminded Group. Arch.

2. CONKLIN, AGNES M. Failures of Highly Intelligent Pupils. Teachers College Con-

3. HARRIS, DANIEL. The Relations t o College Grades of Some Factors Other Than IntcL

4. - . Factors Affecting Grades. A Review of the Literature, I 930-1 937. Psychol.

5. HERTZ, MARGUERITE R. The Shading Responses in the Rorschach Ink Blot Test: A

6. KLOPFER, BRUNO, and DOUGLAS KELLY. The Rorschach Method. World Book Co.,

7. LINDQUIST, E. F. Statistical Analysis in Educational Research. Houghton Mifflin,

8 . MARGULIES, HELEN. Rorschach Responses of Successful and Unsuccessful Students.

9. RORSCHACH, HERMANN, and EMIL OBERHOLZER. The Application of the Interpreta-

10. VERNON, PHILIP E. The Rorschach Ink Blot Test. Brit. J. Med. Psychol. 13,89-118

Psychol. No. 136, 1932.

tribution to Education, No. 792, 1940.

ligence. Arch. Psychol., No. 131, 1931.

Bull., 37, 125-161, 1940.

Review of Its Scoring and Interpretation. J. General Psychol., 23, 123-167, 1940.

1942.

1940.

Arch. Psychol., No. 271, 1942.

/ion of Form to Psychoanalysis. J. Nerv. and Ment. Dis. 60, 225-248, 359-379, 1924.

179-205, =71-295,1933.

rorschach responses of achieving and nonachieving college students of high ability

Documents