Models vs. Experts #2: Rorschach interpretation

Models vs. Experts #2: Rorschach interpretation

May 3, 2013 Research Insights, Behavioral Finance
Print Friendly
(Last Updated On: January 18, 2017)

Unsuccessful differential diagnosis from the Rorschach

  • Armitage, S. G., & Pearl, D.
  • Journal of Consulting Psychology, 21. 479-484
  • A version of the paper can be found here.
  • Want a summary of academic papers with alpha? Check out our free Academic Alpha Database!

Abstract:

The consistency with which individual or group diagnostic categorization can be predicted from the Rorschach was investigated in two ways; one was an objective statistical approach and the other a subjective judgmental approach. In the first, an attempt was made to relate statistically either single or patterned Rorschach determinants to previously made diagnostic judgments. The results failed to uncover any useful means of arriving at a diagnosis. The judgmental approach was found to be equally unsuccessful in achieving consistent diagnostic predictions.

Prediction:

Can Rorschach be an effective diagnostic tool?

rors

Alpha Highlight:

I’m not a psychologist, but my read on the paper is that protocol = judgement, psychogram = mechanical, and combined = both tools combined. Looks like for neurotic diagnosis the model wins, for paranoid schizophrenia humans win. Overall, there it seems like a bunch of noise and no machine or human can figure it out.

man

Strategy Summary:

Sounds like the Rorschach test is bunk…of course, this study was done in 1957.

Thoughts on the paper?


Note: This site provides NO information on our value investing ETFs or our momentum investing ETFs. Please refer to this site.


Join thousands of other readers and subscribe to our blog.


Please remember that past performance is not an indicator of future results. Please read our full disclosures. The views and opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Alpha Architect, its affiliates or its employees. This material has been provided to you solely for information and educational purposes and does not constitute an offer or solicitation of an offer or any advice or recommendation to purchase any securities or other financial instruments and may not be construed as such. The factual information set forth herein has been obtained or derived from sources believed by the author and Alpha Architect to be reliable but it is not necessarily all-inclusive and is not guaranteed as to its accuracy and is not to be regarded as a representation or warranty, express or implied, as to the information’s accuracy or completeness, nor should the attached information serve as the basis of any investment decision. No part of this material may be reproduced in any form, or referred to in any other publication, without express written permission from Alpha Architect.


Definitions of common statistics used in our analysis are available here (towards the bottom)




About the Author

Wesley R. Gray, Ph.D.

After serving as a Captain in the United States Marine Corps, Dr. Gray earned a PhD, and worked as a finance professor at Drexel University. Dr. Gray’s interest in bridging the research gap between academia and industry led him to found Alpha Architect, an asset management that delivers affordable active exposures for tax-sensitive investors. Dr. Gray has published four books and a number of academic articles. Wes is a regular contributor to multiple industry outlets, to include the following: Wall Street Journal, Forbes, ETF.com, and the CFA Institute. Dr. Gray earned an MBA and a PhD in finance from the University of Chicago and graduated magna cum laude with a BS from The Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania.