COPYRIGHT AND CITATION CONSIDERATIONS FOR THIS THESIS/ DISSERTATION o Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use. o NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes. o ShareAlike — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original. How to cite this thesis Surname, Initial(s). (2012) Title of the thesis or dissertation. PhD. (Chemistry)/ M.Sc. (Physics)/ M.A. (Philosophy)/M.Com. (Finance) etc. [Unpublished]: University of Johannesburg. Retrieved from: https://ujcontent.uj.ac.za/vital/access/manager/Index?site_name=Research%20Output (Accessed: Date). Reviewing psychological projective techniques in the South African context by Marichen Klaver MINOR DISSERTATION Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree MAGISTER EDUCATIONIS in EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY in the FACULTY OF EDUCATION at THE UNIVERSITY OF JOHANNESBURG SUPERVISOR: Dr. H. Dunbar-Krige October 2017 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank my wonderful family for all their support throughout my studying career. Thank you for always believing in me and for all your constant love and support. To Leighton Cooper, thank you for all your encouragement and support. I appreciate your believing in me, even when I doubted myself. I would like to thank my supervisor, Dr Helen Dunbar-Krige for all her support and advice over the two years of my Master’s degree, I appreciate it. ii iii ABSTRACT Due to the historical segregation of educational opportunities, the development of psychological assessment in South Africa took place in a racially segregated society, promoted by unequal allocation of resources based on racial class. Therefore, the development of psychological assessment made use of western models, where the development of similar but separate measures for the different language and racial groups in South Africa were implemented. As a result, current South African standardised, projective techniques are mostly based on western norms and exclude most of the South African population, potentially resulting in inaccurate, invalid test results. Psychological assessment in South Africa faces many challenges at present. Within the diverse nation of South Africa, when conducting psychological assessments, including projective techniques, one must be aware of an individual’s background, abilities, language and cultural background in order to gain a valid and holistic view of the individual. This study intended to review psychological projective techniques within the South African context. This qualitative literature review study intends to review psychological projective techniques within the South African context. The aims of this research study were: (1) to determine and report on what projective techniques are available within the South African context, (2) to explore the challenges of projective techniques in the assessment process and (3) to provide recommendations for the use of projective technique in South Africa. There were limited current research and studies available on projective techniques in the South African context. The two main themes that emerged from the literature include the limited research on projective techniques in the South African context and the non-appropriateness of projective techniques on the diverse South African populations. From the investigation conducted on past and current literature and research on projective techniques, very few projective techniques will be suitable for the South African population. Recommendations were made based on information gathered, that one should keep in mind in order to ensure the appropriateness and validity of projective techniques. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ii AFFIDAVIT iii ABSTRACT iv LIST OF TABLES vii LIST OF FIGURES ix ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS x CHAPTER 1: BACKGROUND AND METHODOLOGY 1.1. INTRODUCTION 1 1.2. BACKGROUND OF RESEARCH STUDY 1 1.3. CONTEXT OF RESEARCH STUDY 4 1.4. AIMS OF THE STUDY 5 1.5. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY 6 1.6. ETHICAL ADHERENCE 7 1.7. BRONFENBRENNER’S SOCIO-ECOLOGICAL MODEL 7 1.8. EDUCATIONAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENTS 9 1.8.1. Purpose of assessment 10 1.8.2. Sattler’s Four pillars of assessment 11 1.8.3. Sattler’s 11 steps in the assessment process 13 1.9. CLARIFICATION OF CONCEPTS 15 1.9.1. Psychological assessment 15 1.9.2. Psychological tests 16 1.9.3. Projective Techniques 16 1.11. CONCLUSION 16 CHAPTER 2: TYPES OF PROJECTIVE TECHNIQUES 2.1. INTRODUCTION 18 2.2. PROJECTIVE TECHNIQUES 18 2.2.1 Projective hypothesis 21 2.2.2 Development of Projective Techniques 20 2.2.3 Classification of psychological tests 21 2.3 TYPES OF PROJECTIVE TECHNIQUES 22 2.3.1. Association techniques 23 2.3.1.1. Rorschach Ink Blot Test 24 v 2.3.1.2. Word association test 25 2.3.1.3. The Hand Test 26 2.3.2. Construction techniques 27 2.3.2.1. Thematic Apperception Test & Children’s Apperception Test 28 2.3.2.2. Roberts-2 31 2.3.2.3. Bene-Anthony Family Relations Test Children’s Version 32 2.3.2.4. Children's Self-Report and Projective Inventory 34 2.3.2.5. The Koppitz-2 35 2.3.2.6. Drawing / story creation methods and art based techniques 36 A. Draw-A-Person Projective Test 37 B. House-Tree-Person Test & Kinetic House-Tree-Person Test 39 C. Kinetic Family Drawing & Kinetic School Drawing 41 D. Diagnostic Drawing Series 43 E. Face Stimulus Assessment 44 F. Disadvantages of projective drawing tests 46 2.3.3. Completion techniques 47 2.3.3.1. Sentence Completion techniques 47 2.3.3.2. Rosenzweig Picture Frustration Study 48 2.3.4. Arrangement/ selection techniques 49 2.3.4.1. Szondi Test 49 2.3.4.2. Lüscher Color Test 50 2.3.5. Expression techniques 50 2.3.5.1. Expressive projective techniques through external objects 50 2.3.5.2. Handwriting Analysis 51 2.4. CONCLUSION 52 CHAPTER 3: FACTORS THAT INFLUENCE THE USE OF PROJECTIVE TECHNIQUES 3.1. INTRODUCTION 54 3.2. PROJECTIVE TESTING IN SOUTH AFRICA 54 3.2.1. Research within the South African context 55 3.2.2. Benefits and disadvantages of using projective techniques 56 3.2.3. Projective Techniques in Practice 57 3.3. FACTORS INFLUENCING ASSESSMENT RESULTS 61 3.3.1. Biological context 61 3.3.2. Social Context 61 3.3.2.1. Language 62 3.3.2.2. Culture 62 vi 3.3.2.3. Bronfenbrenner’s bio-ecological model 64 3.3.3. Methodological factors 64 3.3.3.1. Test administration and testing environment 66 3.3.3.2. Training 67 3.3.3.3. Status of the test-taker and influence of the assessment practitioner 67 3.3.3.4. Bias 68 3.3.3.5. Interpreting patterns in test scores 70 3.4. INTEGRATED APPROACH TO PROJECTIVE TECHNIQUES 71 3.4.1. Initial Assessment and Consultation Procedure 72 3.4.2. Case conceptualisation 73 3.5. CONCLUSION 75 CHAPTER 4: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4.1. INTRODUCTION 76 4.2. EMERGING THEMES 77 4.2.1 Limited research of projective techniques in South African context 77 4.2.2. Non-appropriateness of projective techniques in South African context 79 4.2.2.1. Test development and adaptation 81 4.2.2.2. Language and culture 83 4.3. RECOMMENDATIONS 85 4.4. CONCLUSION 89 REFERENCE LIST 90 ADDENDUM 1: EDITOR LETTER ADDENDUM 2: TURN IT IN REPORT vii LIST OF TABLES Table 1.1. Summary of literature used in this study 11 Table 1.2. Four Pillars of the Assessment Process 12 Table 2.1. Types of projective techniques 23 Table 2.2. The use of the TAT and CAT in South Africa by registration category 31 Table 3.1. Total Mention Score (TMS), Percentage of School Psychologists Using Specific Projective Techniques, and Utility Ratings for Specific Techniques 58 Table 3.2. Tests that are regularly used by practitioners (total sample) 59 Table 3.3. Additional tests that practitioners have identified that they frequently use in their work. 60 Table 3.4. Cross-cultural test use by practitioners. 64 Table 3.5. Types of Bias 68 Table 3.6. Sources of bias in cross-cultural assessment 69 viii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1.1. Literature Review Process 7 Figure 1.2. Assessment process 11 Figure 1.3. Sattler’s 11 steps assessment process 15 Figure 2.1. The Rorschach inkblots examples 24 Figure 2.2. The hand Test manual and picture cards 27 Figure 2.3. The TAT Picture cards 29 Figure 2.4. Children's Apperception Test (CAT) 30 Figure 2.5. Roberts Apperception Test for Children: 2 (Roberts-2) 32 Figure 2.6. Family Relations Test: Children’s Version 33 Figure 2.7. Children's Self-Report and Projective Inventory 34 Figure 2.8. DAP drawing test case examples 38 Figure 2.9. House-Tree-Person (H-T-P) Projective Drawing Technique 40 Figure 2.10. HTP drawing examples 40 Figure 2.11. KFD drawing examples 42 Figure 2.12. KFD drawing test case examples 42 Figure 2.13. Kinetic Drawing System for Family and School 43 Figure 2.14. Diagnostic Drawing Series Examples 44 Figure 2.15. FSA stimulus pictures 45 Figure 2.16. FSA stimulus pictures example 46 Figure 2.17. Picture Frustration Study (PFS) picture cards 49 Figure 2.18. An example of large writing with good and low form standard 52 Figure 3.1. Preparation prior to the assessment process 66 Figure 3.2. Summary of the IAC 73 Figure 3.3. Example genogram 74 Figure 4.1. Emerging Themes 77 Figure 4.2. Guidelines to administering projective techniques 88 ix ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS BDT The Bridge Drawing Test BIS Brink Incomplete sentences DA Dynamic Assessment DAF Draw-a-Face test DAS Draw-a-Story Assessment DAP Draw-a-Person