Rorschach on Wikipedia - a Good Thing

Recently, there has been a dustup in the media around posting not only the inkblots for the Rorschach test on wikipedia, but also what the analysis behind typical responses. The words "creating a furor" around this have even been thrown. I have fallen on the side of - this is knowledge, and spreading knowledge is a good thing.

As background, the Rorschach test is a series of inkblots, like the one shown above, created to assess an individual's personality and even state of mind. Though not the only images used for tests, these blots (10 in all) were created by Swiss pyschiatrist Henry Rorschach in the lat 1920's. The subject is asked to review the inkblots one at a time and say what they see in the inkblot. It is supposed to be a very open ended question in which the subject may immediately blurt out an answer, ask to hold the card the inkblot is on, rotate the card, etc. All of these action reveal something about the subject, not just the answer itself. Even asking whether they are allowed to hold or rotate the card is an indicator.

The "furor" has been created because on Wikipedia, a tremendous information source, a community is posting the tests (inkblots), methodology, what to think about certain answers and actions, etc. It was actually an emergency room doctor, James Heilman, who posted the inkblots and research around the inkblot answers to Wikipedia. Now a community of psychologists have come out strongly against this information on Wikipedia. There reason: "The more test materials are promulgated widely, the more possibility there is to game it,” said Bruce L. Smith, a psychologist and president of the International Society of the Rorschach and Projective Methods, who has posted under the user name SPAdoc (from the NYtimes article).

I can understand the psychologists argument. There has been a vast number of studies, 50 years of research and understanding, and very detailed methodology around the tests. The concern is that people will be able to game the system. Though I am not a psychologist, nor do I play one on TV, I am in disagreement here.

The Wikipedia community is not posting answers to an SAT or final exam here. In the end, the community is trying to share and transfer knowledge from a few to many. For me, philosophically, no matter what it is, the sharing of knowledge to a larger audience always has more positive effects for society than any short term impact of sharing that knowledge.

In this case, we are creating a community that understands more about these tests. More of the community can continue to add to the meaning. Additionally, a larger community now sees, at a very cursory level, what psychologists see and look for in behaviors.

Furthermore, the Rorschach test is but only one indicator of an individual's personality and state of mind. As the NY Times article referred to, if you memorize the eye chart when going to the optometrist, do you really think you are going to fool him/her? That is one test, and s/he has a series of other tests to review your eyesight. In this case, the psychologist will see through other tests, or even through other non-posted subtle signs while taking the test. If a person truly wanted to game the system, they would go to the library and do much further research than the cursory review shown on Wikipedia.