Has Wikipedia Created a Rorschach Cheat Sheet? - New York Times Options

[Newsfeed]

Has Wikipedia Created a Rorschach Cheat Sheet? New York Times
There are tests that have right answers, which are returned with a number on top in a red circle, and there are tests with open-ended ...
View the article

[dtobias]

Since those inkblots were published before 1923, they are definitely public domain in the United States. The pshrinks don't even have the sort of claim the NPG is making to a new copyright based on doing new work to make a photograph of an old picture. They're just trying to get everybody else to comply with their self-serving practices, using vague, ill-founded legal threats. The same bunch has already gotten American Mensa to stop giving specific IQ scores to those who take their tests, because that would be "practicing psychology without a license" and supposedly against various state laws. (The Mensa test is now just "pass/fail" where they only tell you if you're accepted or not.) Anything that knocks the psychologists down a few pegs is fine with me. (No, I'm not using Wikipedia as a revenge platform... nosirree.)

[GlassBeadGame]

Since those inkblots were published before 1923, they are definitely public domain in the United States. The pshrinks don't even have the sort of claim the NPG is making to a new copyright based on doing new work to make a photograph of an old picture. They're just trying to get everybody else to comply with their self-serving practices, using vague, ill-founded legal threats. The same bunch has already gotten American Mensa to stop giving specific IQ scores to those who take their tests, because that would be "practicing psychology without a license" and supposedly against various state laws. (The Mensa test is now just "pass/fail" where they only tell you if you're accepted or not.) Anything that knocks the psychologists down a few pegs is fine with me. (No, I'm not using Wikipedia as a revenge platform... nosirree.)

I didn't know Mensa didn't use full safeguards and rigors, including the use of licensed professionals administering the tests. It seems to me if you want to hold your members out as having a certain psychological attribute you would want to do so. Is it like fortune telling then? Does the Mensa wall plaque say "for entertainment purposes only?"

[dtobias]

I didn't know Mensa didn't use full safeguards and rigors, including the use of licensed professionals administering the tests. It seems to me if you want to hold your members out as having a certain psychological attribute you would want to do so. Is it like fortune telling then? Does the Mensa wall plaque say "for entertainment purposes only?"

Mensa has a Supervisory Psychologist at the national and international levels to certify that proper test standards are used; he/she is licensed. However, the local administration of the tests is by volunteer proctors who have to undergo some minor training but aren't psychologists; that is why the psychologist profession insists Mensa not actually call the tests "IQ tests" or give a precise score from them.

[GlassBeadGame]

I didn't know Mensa didn't use full safeguards and rigors, including the use of licensed professionals administering the tests. It seems to me if you want to hold your members out as having a certain psychological attribute you would want to do so. Is it like fortune telling then? Does the Mensa wall plaque say "for entertainment purposes only?"

Mensa has a Supervisory Psychologist at the national and international levels to certify that proper test standards are used; he/she is licensed. However, the local administration of the tests is by volunteer proctors who have to undergo some minor training but aren't psychologists; that is why the psychologist profession insists Mensa not actually call the tests "IQ tests" or give a precise score from them.

So Mensa employees a psychologist who does not adhere to the standards of the profession for the purpose of administering the tests?

[Somey]

So Mensa employees a psychologist who does not adhere to the standards of the profession for the purpose of administering the tests?

More importantly, does this mean my own IQ score of 457 is likely to be declared "invalid" merely because the test was administered by Squeebles, my pet hamster?

Squeebles won't be happy about that... not at all.

[Milton Roe]

So Mensa employees a psychologist who does not adhere to the standards of the profession for the purpose of administering the tests?

More importantly, does this mean my own IQ score of 457 is likely to be declared "invalid" merely because the test was administered by Squeebles, my pet hamster?

Squeebles won't be happy about that... not at all.

The only proper IQ tests given by animals are administered by cats. Differentiate "I want out" meow from "I want a can of catfood" meow, and you pass. Barely.

(IMG:http://i288.photobucket.com/albums/ll191/Shrlocc/Catwalks.gif)
Hey, I'm walkin' here!

[Apathetic]

Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Rorschach_test_images

Lulzworthy comments from the talk page from (an apparent raging psychotic ;>) iridescent:

*Who is going to write the [[WP:ALT|alt text]]? —mattisse 20:10, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

::Ooh, can I have a go? [[File:Rorschach blot 04.jpg|alt=Fat chick on a motorbike... no, wait, a sheepskin rug... oh, hang on, it's a butterfly... or is it a flasher with an improbably long manhood...]] – iridescent 20:17, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

[Cla68]

Why don't psychologists want the Rorschach images freely available on the web? Some possible explanations:

- Psychologists feel that their profession and credibility are under constant attack and want to control/protect their methods and image as much as possible.
- There are too many psychologists out there competing with each other for a scarce amount of work and prestige, therefore they don't want any of their tools taken away from them.
- They genuinely believe that the Rorshach test is an effective tool and are trying to protect its integrity.

Compare/contrast this with polygraph profession. When someone "reveals" the "secrets" behind polygraphs, such as here, professional polygraph examiners don't appear to appreciate it very much.

[CharlotteWebb]

Is there any reason not to merge this with the previous thread:
http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=24972

(or vice versa, I don't see how it fits in "support group")