Thematic Apperception Test

The Thematic Perception Test (also: Thematic Apperception Test ), abgeküzt TAT in the literature, is a 1935 developed by Henry A. Murray and Christiana D. Morgan projective test, which is used as a personality test or, in the psychology of motivation, for the measurement of motives.

Meanwhile, there are some recent modifications in which both other images are used, and each evaluation procedures. Developments carried out by, among other things:

• McClelland ( Picture- Story Exercise PSE)
• Moulton (1958)
• Heckhausen (1963 )

In the German speaking part of the TAT was publicized by edited by William lapel manual. Extensive empirical findings and a new version of the TAT are presented by lapels and Allesch (TGT -(S) 1985). Furthermore, the multi- operant motive test Osnabrück was developed.

More Operationalisierungsversuche are:

• SCOR (Social Cognition and Object Relations Scale) of the West ( 1991)
• SCOR -Q ( with Q -Sort method for projective stories ) of the West ( 1995)

• 3.1 Evaluation by Henry A. Murray
• 3.2 Recent evaluation methods

• 4.1 reliability
• 4.2 validity

Test material

Test material of Henry A. Murray

In the inspired by psychoanalysis psychodiagnostic method you put the subject black / white illustrations available which show mostly people in everyday situations. There are a total of 31 cards, of which are presented in 2 sessions a maximum of 20. On the back of the cards in order to be presented are numbered. Some wear additional letters for which group of people they are intended to specify. There are doing the following groups:

• B ( Boys), ie boys
• G (Girls ), i.e. girls
• M ( Males ), that is, men over 14 years
• F- ( Females ), that is, women over 14 years

Thus, the subjects of the remaining 20 panels will be displayed in the first meeting 10. In the second session, the remaining 10, which, as Murray ( 1943) writes, deliberately unusual, dramatic and bizarre were. In addition, the panel 16 is completely white.

Recent test material

In a now common modification of only the first 10 boards and the Table No. 16 are (white ) are shown. Depending on the problem, individual panels of the second half of the series to be taken. The selection depends on the thematic valency.

Testing

According to Murray ( 1943), one should ask the subjects in the first session, each of the 10 panels that you show him one by one, to tell a story as dramatic as he can. It is intended to tell the following:

• What led to the situation shown?
• What is happening?
• What the people feel and think?
• What is the outcome of the story?

For the 10 panels are 50 minutes time. So you have about 5 minutes for each image.

In a second session, the subject, as in the first session, to tell another 10 boards stories. The instruction can be a little shorter. However, should not be told to the subjects at the first meeting that he intended to tell stories again in the second, as it might otherwise collects stories from books or movies. At least one day should elapse between the first and second session.

In addition, even a subsequent interview to be conducted to know the key for interpreting biographical background to the stories. This interview could be conducted immediately following or postponed by a few days.

Evaluation

Evaluation by Henry A. Murray

From the content of the stories, the examiner closes back to the inner experience and personal perception of the subject. The evaluation is carried out either by a counting mechanism after a relatively objective criteria - including a computerized system - or by an intuitive - holistic approach.

In Manual of Tests of Murray ( 1943), the author makes suggestions for the evaluation of each story:

Important for the evaluation was also the biographical data collected in the subsequent interview involve.

Recent evaluation methods

In the 80s, another, description, close evaluation scheme was developed at the Institute of Psychology II, University of Cologne. Werner Seifert developed an evaluation scheme containing the following four parameters:

By logging table gives an overview of typical life and coping patterns of the subjects.

Test quality criteria

Since the classic version of the TAT produced by Henry A. Murray no numbers, ie no measurement, no test quality criteria can be calculated for this purpose. All the numbers on test quality criteria therefore refer to different later developed methods that attempt to transform the linguistic statements in numbers. Some of these methods even based on methods that use other images or capture other substantive constructs.

Reliability

Murray also writes: "Seeing did the TAT responses reflect the fleeting mood as well as the present life situation of the subject, We Should not expect the repeat reliability of the test to be high, even though the bulk of the content objectifies tendencies and traits did are Relatively constant. Data on this point are lacking. " When, as Murray writes, the TAT recognized a construct that is changing significantly over time, so it is clear that the test-retest reliability must be low when it detects this construct valid. Recent results (see Schultheiss & Pang, 2005) show, however, that the detected by the TAT / PSE motifs are even sufficiently stable over decades. The problem of test-retest reliability may thus particularly by variations of the instruction to invent a creative story come about as possible ( Lundy, 1986). The main problem of reliability, however, the internal consistency is: it is usually in an unacceptable even negative area and is inversely related to the validity ( Reumann, 1982). Be a possible explanation for this finding may be that the TAT implicit motives, thus measures drove equivalent constructs. For example, in the first image, a subject is highly encouraged, as this motif falls in the second picture lower ( Atkinson & Birch, 1970). This problem of Reliabilitätsmessung employs the psychometric research for years. For example, trying Blankenship et al. (2006) to solve this problem by calculating the reliability of using the Rasch model. This approach is, however, the content of the theoretical foundations of the TAT does not do justice. Currently the only fruitful approach is to use as the basis of Reliabilitätsmessung not the image values ​​but the characteristic values ​​determined on the categories the method of Gruber and Kreuzpointner ( 2013).

Validity

• It would be interesting even to supplement, on which evaluation method of the TAT refers to the criticism.
• Equally interesting is what form has proven itself in science, which test batteries show a link and the source from which the information originates.

The validity of the TAT is questioned, since neither the criteria of the test-retest reliability, internal consistency nor be sufficiently met.

Against this criticism is argued that those test quality criteria were not suitable for Validitätseinschätzung of the TAT. The low test-retest reliability based on the fact that the participants will applied to invent imaginative, original stories. Follow-up tests should therefore necessarily provide hardly match. This is supported by the fact that the test-retest reliability increases as soon as indicating the subjects that they can tell similar stories in the second test as in the first part ( Winter 1996). The low internal consistency is attributed to two causes:

• Motivational processes show a sequential dynamics, ie needs be for some time after, after they have been satisfied. The probability that a subject writes a performance-based story is reduced if he has just written one.
• Cognitive processes show a general tendency to avoid repetitions (negative Rezenzeffekt known from memory and attention research )

In the empirical research, the TAT has been proven. Within the test batteries obtained by the process findings are confirmed and supported generally by the other tests. An extensive empirical study on this work provides the " educational disadvantage. Why can not the one and the other does not want " by Guido Breidebach.