TY - JOUR
T1 - Estimating the Effects of Thematic Apperception Test Card Content on SCORS–G Ratings
T2 - Replication With a Nonclinical Sample
AU - Siefert, Caleb J.
AU - Stein, Michelle B.
AU - Slavin-Mulford, Jenelle
AU - Sinclair, Samuel Justin
AU - Haggerty, Greg
AU - Blais, Mark A.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2016 Taylor & Francis.
PY - 2016/11/1
Y1 - 2016/11/1
N2 - The content of Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) cards can, in some cases, influence how respondents form narratives. This study examines how imagery from select TAT cards affects the narratives of respondents from a nonclinical setting. The Social Cognition and Object Relations Scale–Global Rating Method (SCORS–G; Stein, Hilsenroth, Slavin-Mulford, & Pinsker, 2011; Westen, Lohr, Silk, Kerber, & Goodrich, 1989) was used to rate narratives. Forty-nine college students provided narratives to 6 TAT cards. Narratives were rated by two expert raters using the SCORS–G. Consistent with prior research, Card 2 exhibited the most pull for adaptive ratings on SCORS–G scales, and 3 BM exhibited the most pull for maladaptive ratings. Findings for other cards were mixed. Although raters were highly reliable, internal consistency estimates were lower than desirable for 6 of the 8 SCORS–G scales. Variance component estimates indicated that card by person interactions accounted for the largest amount of variance in person-level scores. Results and limitations are discussed in light of prior research. We also make suggestions for further lines of research in this area.
AB - The content of Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) cards can, in some cases, influence how respondents form narratives. This study examines how imagery from select TAT cards affects the narratives of respondents from a nonclinical setting. The Social Cognition and Object Relations Scale–Global Rating Method (SCORS–G; Stein, Hilsenroth, Slavin-Mulford, & Pinsker, 2011; Westen, Lohr, Silk, Kerber, & Goodrich, 1989) was used to rate narratives. Forty-nine college students provided narratives to 6 TAT cards. Narratives were rated by two expert raters using the SCORS–G. Consistent with prior research, Card 2 exhibited the most pull for adaptive ratings on SCORS–G scales, and 3 BM exhibited the most pull for maladaptive ratings. Findings for other cards were mixed. Although raters were highly reliable, internal consistency estimates were lower than desirable for 6 of the 8 SCORS–G scales. Variance component estimates indicated that card by person interactions accounted for the largest amount of variance in person-level scores. Results and limitations are discussed in light of prior research. We also make suggestions for further lines of research in this area.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84964556470&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84964556470&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/00223891.2016.1167696
DO - 10.1080/00223891.2016.1167696
M3 - Article
C2 - 27100311
AN - SCOPUS:84964556470
SN - 0022-3891
VL - 98
SP - 598
EP - 607
JO - Journal of Personality Assessment
JF - Journal of Personality Assessment
IS - 6
ER -