Portland State University

PDXScholar
Regional Research Institute Regional Research Institute

1956

A Manual for Objective TAT Scoring

Richard H. Dana
Portland State University

Let us know how access to this document benefits you.

Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/rri_facpubs
Part of the Other Psychiatry and Psychology Commons

Citation Details
Dana, Richard H., "A Manual for Objective TAT Scoring" (1956). Regional Research Institute. 34.
https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/rri_facpubs/34

This Working Paper is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Regional Research Institute by an authorized
administrator of PDXScholar. For more information, please contact [email protected].
·,.. ...
i
,

A l-1anual for Objective TAT Scoring

R:i,chard: H.. Dana

St, Louis State Hospital'

..1;"­
.
"

The research in this manual was carried out,in connection with an

investigation supported in part by a research grant from The National

Institute ,0f :H~ntal Health, of the Na,tional InFltitutes of Health, Public

Health Service•

.­
 Table of Contents

Preface

Introduction..... '0' .......... II . . . . . . . . . . . • ' . . . . . . . 1t • • • •

1

Rationale •••••••••••••••••••••• , ••••••••••• 1., •••• 1

Scoring Categories •••••••••,••••••••• ,............. 1

1. Perceptual Organization••••••••••••••• '.. •••• 1

Description•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 1

Scoring Directions ••••••••••••••••••••••• 2

2. Perceptual Range •••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 3

Description•••••••• , ••••••••••••••••••••• 3

Scoring Directions •••••••• 4 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 3

3.. Perceptual ~ersonalization.................. 4

Description•••••••••••••••••••'••• , • • • • • • • 4

Scoring Directions ••••••••• 4 • • • • • • • • • • • • • 4

Card Seiection••••••••••••••••••••••••• , •••••••••• 5

Subjects •••••••••••••••••••••••• , •••••••••••••••• , 7

Reliability ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 10

Validity .'. • • • . • • • • • • • • • . • . . • • • • • . • • • • • . • • • • .. • • . • •• 15

T-S oores ...... j •.•••• , • " . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • "• • • • • • 4 • • • • • •• 24

Discussion•••., ................. "~ It . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • • • 26

Refere~ce5 ••••• , •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 31

Appendix A, •••••••••••• , ••••••••• ~ •••••••••••••••• 32

Score sheet, male

Score sheet, female

.. J
"
 List of Tables'

l~ Product-moment Correlations of PO Scores for Eaoh Card with PO Score

for All Cards (67 Normal Female §.s) •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 6

20 Product-moment Intercorrelations Between PO Scores on Five Cards

(67 Non:nal FetIlC\le ~a) ••••• , •••••• ·, •••••• , ••••• , ••·•• ,.,., •• ,............... S
30 Product-moment Intercorrelatiops of Categories PO, PR, PP for Three
Groups in the Male Sample •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ,9
4'0 Scoring Cqtegory Reliability (per cent of agreement) for Male
Validation, Male Cro5s-Validati~n (C), and Female Validation Sampl~s •• , 11

5" PO Item Reliability (per cent of agreement) for Male Validation, Male
Cross-validation (C), and Female Validation Samples •••••••• ; •••• , •••••• 12

6. FR Item ~1iability (per oent of ~greement) for Male Validation, Male

Cross...validation' (C), and Female Validation Samples •••••• ' ! . . . . . ,'• • '."1 13

7. PP Category Reliability (per ?ent of agreement) by Sexes and Diagnostic'

Group••••• Ii • Ii • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • , , ..... ~ , •••• f ,'. . . . . . . . II" ., ••••••••• Ii • • .. • • l.4

8. Meane, Standard Deviations (SD) and Ranges for Mal~ (M), Male Cross­

validation (C) and Female (F) Validation Samples of Normal, Neurotic,

and Psychotic Groups in Each Scoring Category.! •••••••••••••• ' f •• ' ••••• 16

9. Summary of r.fedian Test Results on PO, PR, PP Scores of Male Validation

Sample. , ••••• It • , Ii • • ! ••••• II , • • • f • , • • • II • • • • • • • , , f • • • • • f • f • • , . . . . . . . . . . t , • • 17

10. S~ry of Hedian Test R~5~lts on PO, PR, PP Scpres of Female "Validation

Sample ••••••••• , ~ •••• , ..... , •• , .... , ......... ! f f •••••• t ••••••••••• J ••• ! • •• 18

11. Summary of :t<Iedian Test Results on PO, FR, PP Scores of Male Cross- .

validation Sample ••••••• ~, ••••••••• , ••• ' •••• f.' ••• ~ ••••••• 'f •••• , •••••• 19

12. Normal-neurotic and Neurotic-psychotic l-Iediana for l'fale Validation,'

Male'Cros8~validation (C), Female Validati~nJ Total Ma~ a,nd Total

l.fale and. Female Samp+es for TAT Scoring Categories PO" ill, PP., ••• , ••'~ 20
 List of Tables (cont.)
13. Percentage of 2s in Each Gro~p Receiving Scores of 0, 1, 2 on Each

Category.~ •••• ' ••• ' ••• ~ ••• " " ' f " . ' •• "."#".'.~.' •• ' ••• ~ ••••••••• , •• 22

14. Product-moment Correlations between Categories PO, PR, PP and Length

for Two Samples, Male and Female, Each of Three Groups, 50 ~s in each

Group ••••••••• , ~ ......... ., ••• , •••• ~ ................ , ••••• , • ' .••• , •••••• , •• 23

15. Pro~uct-moment Correlations between PO, PRI PP and Iptellige~e Test

Scores "for Three Female "Groups •• , •• ",. ~" •• ,,,"•• ,, ••••••••••••••••••••••••• 25

16. T-Scores "for Categories POI PR, PP•••••••••••••••••••••••••• ~ •• 't •• , ••• 27

17. T-Score Percentages of Normal, Neurotic and Psychotic ~s'for Each

Scoring Categoryo ............ , •• ,"•••• ~ •• , •••••••••••••••••• , •••••• , •• ,., 2B
lB. T-Score Percentages of Normal, Neurotic and Psychotic ~s for Scoring
Categories PO and ffi Conibined o 10 • • • • ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .- • • • • • " • • • • • • • •"•• , ••• 29

19. T-Score Per~entages of Normal, Neurotic and Psychotic ~s for Scoring

Categories PO and PP Combined•• , •••••••••••••••• , ••••••••••••• .-•••• , ••• 29

20<) T-Score Percentages of Normal, Neurotic and Psy-chotic §.S for Scoring

Categories FR' and PP Combine~ ••• ~ ••• t ••••••• , ••••••• ~ •••• , ••••••• " •••• 29

21. T-Score Percentages of Normal, Neurotic and Psyohotic" ~s for Scoring

Categories" PO, Hi, PP Combined. f ~,! •••• , •• , • • • ~ • • • • • • • • • ~., . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

 Preface

This manual presents a concise but abbreviated statement of ~

objective TAT sco~i~ system and its predictive efficiency. It is ~esigned

to facilitate application of this approach to TAT scoring. Although the

rationale upon which this method is predicate?, derives from certain specific
assumptions regarding personality, the clinical use of these categories does
not demand any Earticular theoretical persuasion. The author recognizes two
kinds of validity germane to projective instruments: <.a) validityl' pre­
diction of olinical diagnosis; (b) validitY2' predictio~ of personality

characteristics. This manual deals only with validitYl" As the material

contained herein is still large~ in tentative form, the author ~dll welcome
suggestions~ ammendations,' elaborations, criticism. '£his manual O,\,<les its
existence to many individuals who helped collect the data, score the pro­
tocols, apply statistical techniques, and type the various manuscripts,
Their combined efforts have made this manual possible.
 -1­

Introduction
.......... Clinical use of the TAT has been largely restricted to content analysis
'by the plethora of cumbersome scoring systems currently available, That
scoring systems should be §_;mple, objective" employ st~mulus properties of
the TAT cards, and be related to 122.rsona,li.:t.l theory, is becoming empirically
. evident. That TA'F scoring can be a cler,ical procedure c:.nd interpretation a
clinical skill ~s con1ruent with the new look in projertive testing. The
--
use of objective scoring does not imply abandonment of content analysis but
is merely a fonnal aid to this process.
P~tiona1e

Discussion of the approach to personality theory uhich antedated the

rationale for '!:AT scoring is rtot appropriate here (3) ~ How'ever" there are at
least three aspects of test behavior to be considered in devising objective
scoring systems (6): (a) approach to the situation (reflected" for e~mple"
in the manner standard test directions are followed).; (b) normality of
responses (abstractions of structural and content material included by
specified percentages of II nonnal" §..s);' (c) rarity of responses (those in­
frequent responses in a II normal" population which appear.with sign;ificantly
higher frequency in psychopathological conditions),
Scoring Categories
These tqree aspects of test behavior have been objectified'as Perceptual
Organization, Perceptual Range, and Perceptual Personalizatio~respectively.

1. Perceptual Organization (po)

Description

This categor.¥ reflects the ~!s ability to follow the standard directions
to tltell a: story." Seven possible components are included: (a) card des­
 -2­
cription; (b) present behavior; (c) past events; (d) future events; (e)
feeling; (f) thought; (g) outcome.

PO Scori?s Dir~ction~

You are scoring to see hOl" closely the subject follmved the original
test directions~ Score sheets are provided (Appendix A) which are used to
record PO, P.[~ and PP. The score sheet contains a list of the seven com­
ponents (abbreviated as CD, PB~ PE, FE, F, T, 0 respectively) and spaces to
re~ord presenoe or absence of each component for each card used. Columns
have been labeled for cards 2, 3, 4, 6, 7 and apace is left for any other
cards which may have been administered. Each PO component present in stvr,y
is scored by placing a plus (+) in the appropriate space on the score sheet.
A minus (-) is scored for components not included. ITo score is given for
frequency of appearance on each card.. .
Any of these components which appear after the first question by the
examiner (additional scores) should be entered on the sheet and the entry
circled.
All stories given by the subject mal be scored. The total PO score is the
sum of acores to the five storjes.from c~rds 2, 3, 4, 6, 7. Note that space
is also provided for tal1;rir-8 frequency (f) of components for all cards.
Circled PO cOnl.:)onen"i.:,s .1?h2.~)'£ !!o~ be added in obtaining the total PO score.
Enter total sccre in to::~ J....!be::...:ld Tj en·t,er total additional scores in box
labeled T add.
a. Card Description (CD)
Physical description of two or more things or persons actually present
in the picture. It may be a listing such as, "This is a man, a woman, a tree,
etc. IF It may oerve to introduce the story, liThe boy is on the floor" •• t ,liThe
woman who is by the tree is •••• ii In these cases there is never any action;
merely description. If the word Itpicture U is used, then only ~ person or
thing need follow, IIThis is a picture of a boy.lI. CD may occur anywhere in the
story.
b. Present_I?ehavior (PB)
Any activity or behavior that occurs in the present or is in the process
ot occurring within the picture. For example (card 2), liThe man is plowing
the field. 1I Activity which occurs outside of the frame-of-reference of the
picture is scored Past Events or F'uture Events.
c. Fast.Events (FE)
Things, events, situations which have taken place in the past, i.e.,
before the time of the scene pictured on the card and described in the story.
These may be in the ~~ediate or the remote past and ~ust be sp~cified and
def~nite things~ events, or situations,
 -3­
d. Future Events (FE)
.......---'--­
Things, events, situations vn1ich will take plnce or ~o take place in the
future, i.e., nfter,the tinle of the scene pictured on the card 'and described
in the stor,y., These may be in the immediate or remote future and must be
specifio and definite things, events, or situations.
e. Feeling (1")
Any expression of feeling or emotion on the part of the characters
present in the story. 'fhis includes affect, i.e., sad, mad, in love, and
de sire, i. e., wishing and wanting (but not ~),
f. Thought (T)
Any expression of thought, memory, drerun or allied mental state present
in the story. This inclUdes deCision, belief, realization, knowing, praying,
figuring, etc.
g. Outoome (0)

The inclusion of a specific statement Wh~ch indicates the ending,

denouement, finale, or conclusion of the story. This nmy consist in behavior,
feeling, thought or even, rare~, be present by i'!lpU,.cation in future events.
If this does occur, both outcome and futur:e events are scored. Usually
appears at or near the end of the story, i.e. 1 the last sentence or phrase..
2. Perceptual Hange (PR.)
Description
Empirical evidence has been used to establish cri~eria as to content a
group of Il no I".tlla11l §.S will inclUde in their TAT stories a given pet¥eent~e

of the time (11),. Three se?arate stimulus properties were chosen for each
card on the basis of inclusion by approx~nately 90 per cent or more of this
"normal" group.
ill Scoriqg Directio.ill!,
You are scoring to see how closely the subject adheres to nor.ms for
various aspects of the stories, The 15 stimulus properties for males are:
Card 2 (a) family: young girl, woman, activity specified; adult male; (b)
fields or farm; (c.) books or school; Card 3 (d) figure, sex and age specified;
(e) emotions noted; (f) activity specj.fied; Card 4 (g) rn.ale~ emotions n9ted,
activity specified, (h) womnnJ'activit.1'spe~ifiedj· (i) conrlic~ ~r'e6op~rati~n,
Card 6'(j) man; emotions noted, aotivity specified; (k) womanJ emotions'uotedl
(1) ~ersonality ~eforrentJ Card 7 (m) older male, nctivity speoifiedt relatio~
ship specified; (n) mls, emot;i..ons noted, (o) personaJ:i-t;r referrent~ . The '1,
stimuluB properties for women &re:
Card 2 (a) family: young girl, activity specified; woman' adult male; (b)
fields or farm; (c) books or school; Card 3 Cd) female; te) emotions noted;
activity specified; (f) story: death, murder, illness, frustration; Ct~rd 4
(:;) male; emotions noted; activity specified; (ll) woman; activity specified,;
(i) conflict or cooperation; Card 6 (j) male, activity indicated; (k) female,
emotions noted~ (1) relationship indicated; Card 7 (m) adult female, activitl
specified; emotions noted; (n) child, female, emotions.noted; (0) relation­
ship specified. You have been provi.de~lv.ith criteria lists on a score sheet
(M or F). (Appendix A). All items included in each criterion must be mentioned
for score to be earned. No score is f$iven for ind,efinite or ambiguous state­
ments.- For example, in Card 2 (male), if the "family," the lIyoung girl," the
II woman/' and-' the lIadult male a.re mentioned, no score is- given because the
ll

tractivityl' of the "womanll if? not specified ..

Road each story once, then go ta ck and look for eaoh particular_item in
each criterion; finally, check off complete criteria on the score sheet, plus
(+) f~r ~hose present; minus (-) for those not included in story.

To obtain the total Fa score, add the plus scores obtained for each stor.r,
and enter in box labeled T.
3. Perceptual Personalization (pp)
Description
Some expression, words, and phrases used in the sto~ are incongruous ­
and have no obvious reference to the story that 2 is trying to relate. These
inclusions are clearly neither stimulus reproductions nor additions to the
stimulus, PP are deviations from the relatively consistent, organized, c~

herent protocol-product, the Ta~ story. These deviations, in order to be

scored, must be extreme. They may refer to things labeled performance
adequacy, comments, parenthetical remarks, qualifications, picture criticisms,
adventitious C::'escriptions, vagueness, evasion, or direct personal reference.
l! Scoring Directions
As you read each story you will note that certain words and phrases do not
seem to belong with the rest of the sto~. They do not add anything to the .
ideas and events in the story. These words and phrases include all questions
and remarks ~onceming the ,;ray the subject feels about his performance, the
picture., and hiil1self, They may refer to thin~s which have been called lIadequacy
of performance,ll lfqualification,lI "picture criticisms," lIya.gueness and evasion,"
and II personal reference ~ II . .

Examples of these lIout of place ll ''lords a:nd phrases follow:

 -5­
Questions; nls that a boy or a girl?" tI\ihat t s that supposed to be?U
~deguacI of p'erformancas "I canlt figure that one out.1I
Qua.lificp.ti?~: "vlait a minutE:>,.;.1I "Itls not real'J¥ that at all. 1I
Picture criticism: "This picture is silly.1I IIThere is no point to
this at all."" .
I;arenthetical pomments; "That S s about all on that,ll "There is not
much connected with it.1I
Adventitious descri-otive comments: Any remarks just thrown in without
apparent connection to the rest of the story. These remarks often pertain to
physical description of the picture, or the people in it.
yaguenes;a and evasJ.on: "or•••• 01'," II either••• ,or," !lmore or less,lI
II or someth J.ng"
. 11 II '. , ••••••••w,ha t ever ~
. t ·~S. II

Persona+ ;reference: Any reference to urn. Any inclusion of personal

information'which is identified as such by the subject.
List the words and phrases by number for each 'card scored on the
appropriate score sheet (M or F ) . ' .
List each word or phrase to be scored sepa~ately

One point is given for each word or phrase listed.

The PP score is the total number of points for all cards scored. Enter
the total PP score in the box labeled,T.
Card Selection
Five TAT cards were selected ,to compose the basic life situations: Cards
2J 3B4, 4, 6rn4" and 7BM for males; cards 2, 3GF" 4, 6GF, and 7GF for females.
, , '

The usa 'of short-form TAT sets has been experimentally evaluated by comparing
PO scores for short-form sets with the total set of cards (7). fhe inclusion'
of particular cards was found to be of less importance than the actual number
of cards selected. T..'\T sets of as few as five cards, when scored for PO,
provide data which is roughly equivalent to that from the entire series. PO
scores from the short-form set. for women correlated .• 9l with scores from the
entire set.
Table 1 presents correlations of PO scores for each card with the scores
 -6­
Table 1

Product-moment Correlations of PO Scores

, . for

Each Card with PO Score -for AlrCards·,

'( 67 Normal Female Sa)
-
Card .!:

1 .72

2 .68

3 ,76

4 .69

5 .73

6 • 61~

7 .74

8 .74

9 .. 75 •

lO .77

II .70

l2 .70

13 .72

14 .78

l5 .7l

l6 .60

17 .63 .

l8 .. 63

19 .65

20 .64

Mean r .70 (z t~ansfotmation)

 -7­
for the entire set with Z transformations to provide a illean correlation.
Table 2 presents the product~moment intercorreL1tions of. PO scores for
normal female ~s. These data indicate that the stimulus-values of the selected
?

TAT cards (in. terms of N of PO items) are approx;i..mately equivalent.

Table 3.~ummarizes the product-moment intercorrelations of scoring
categories PO, PR, PP, for three diagnostic groups in the male sample (2).
Significant relationships obtain between all three categories. PO and PP
are inversely related such that high scores on PO tend to occur with low
scores on pP. To a considerably lesser degree PR and PP are alsQ inversely
related. These figur.es raise ·the question of overlap between PO and P.R
especially, and to a lesser extent between PO and PP. Further research must
explore the significance of these interrelationships. The assumptions r con-
cerning personality which led to this TAT. manu~l are thoroughly congruent with
such associations among scoring categories,
Subjeets
,
The Sa on whpm this manual is b~sed were from validation and cross-
validation samples (4, 8, 9, 10). The validation sample contained 300 ~s, 150
males and 150 females, with 100 normals, 100 neurotics, 100 psychotics. The
cross-validation sample contained 90 male ~s, 30 normals, 30 neurotics, 30
psychotics. The normal male §.S were college students \dth no history of
psychiatric illn~ss; the normal female §.s· were student nurses with MMPI T
scores all below 70. The neurotic and psychotic male §.s lI.fere chosen .in terms
of previously determined criteria: (a) hospitalized; (b) diagnostic agreement
between psychiatrist and psychologist; (c) independent diagnostic formulations;
(d) diagnosis: neurosis or schizophrenia, The neurotic and psychotic female
§s were. chosen in terms of these same criteria with one exception; out patient
clinic neurotics were used. The males in the cross-validation sample were
 -8­
Table 2

Product-moment Intercorrelations

Between PO Scores on Five Cards

(67 Normal Female ~s)

Card 3 4 . 6

2 .. 62 .lIJ .• 50 .53

3 .61 .57 .58

4 .58 .57

6 .60

Note.--All figures are significant

at <101 level of confidenoe.
 -9­
Table 3
Product-moment Intercorrelations of

Categories PO, PR, PP for Three

Groups in the Male Sample

Category ffi pp

ro
Group:
Normal .25 _.4Q;H'r

Neurotic .43~H~ -.321~

Psychotic •53*''*' -.4()l,U,r

m
Group:
. Normal -.18
Neurotic' .01
Psychoti"c -.3lf~

*Signif~cant at the .05 level

of confidence.
~~Significant at the .01 level
of confidence •.
 -10­
chosen in terms of these same criteria with one exception; outpatient clinic
neurotics were used. All ~s were between the ages of 20 and 40, \iith I.Q.
scores of average or better.
Reliability
Two kinds of scorer reliability were used (5, 6): (a) scoring category
reliability; (b) reliability of the items composing the categories. Scorer
reliability lIms determined by means of percent of agreement. Both kinds of
scorer reliability were calcuL~ted for all three groups, \~th various scorers,
psychologists and clerks~ From the male validation sample 75 stories, 25
from each group, were randomly drawn, coded, and scored for reliability. The
same process were used for 150 stories from the female sample and 75 stories
from the male croos-validat~on sample. In all the reliability tables the
figures reported for the male-validation sample represent the average per cent
of agreement for three scorer~; the figures for the male cross-validation
sample and the female sample represent the percent of agre.ement for two
sC0rers.
Table 4 summarizes the per cent of agreement figures for scoring categc~

reliability. The highest figures obtained for the male validation ~ample are
reported. The reliability for PO r~nges from 88 to, 94 per cent of agreement;
PR from 86 to 91 per cent; and PP from 75 to 86 per cent. The increase in
reliability for t he female and male cross...validation samples is attributable to:
(a) additional practice in scoring; (b) formalization of scoring criteria on an
easily used score sheet. It should be noted that although the PR criteria
differ for male and female §.S that the reliability of scoring is almost iden­
tical.
The reliability of scoring separate FO and PR items is presented in Tables
5 and 6. The mean reliability figures (scoring category reliability) differ in
 -11­

Table 4
Scoring Category Reliability (per cent of
agreement) for Male Validation,
Male Cross-validation (C) I and
Female Validation Samples

Sample Category
ro FR pp

Male 88 ·86 86
Male (cl 93 89 75
Female 94 91 76
 -12­
Table S
PO Item Reliability (per cent of agreement)
for Male Validation, Male Cross-validation
(C)~ and Female Validation Samples

"

Item Sample

Male Male (C) Female

Card Description 91. 91 91

Present Behavior 89 91 94

Past Events 90 91 94

Future Events 89 97 93

Feeling 89 90 95

Thought 81 89 96

Outcome 92 99 96

Mean 89 .
93 94
 -

-13­
Table 6
ffi Item Reliability (per cent of agreement)

for Male Validation, Male Cross-validation

(C), and Female Validation Samples

Item Sample
,1-1ale Male (C~ Female

1 69 93 87

2 86 93 100

3 100 100 87

4 93 100 100

5 86 87 93

6 '71 87 83

7 82 87 93

8 95 87 93

9 93 80 90

10 60 93 93.

II 82 80 87

12 62 '87 87

13 84 80 BO

14 69 87 97

15 69 93 100

lvIean SO 89 91
 · Table 7

PP Oategor,r Reiiability (~er cent of agreement)

by Sex~s and Diagndstic Group

d~~p
: :'.
NOJ1'll181 Behrotie P~1chdtic :
Male 88 84 76
Male (0) 82 73 74
Female 78 77 76
same instances for the male sample from those reported in Table 4 because the
component entries are themselves mean agreements of three scorers. No con­
sistent or large differences appear between males or"females and ~here were
no significant differences in scoring the three diagnostic groups, Thus, the
reliability figures for each diagnostic group are omitted. The reliability of
scoring separate PO items (on all samples) ranged from 89 to 97 per cent of
agreement;. PR from 60 to 100 per cent of agreement.
Table 7 prosents the reliability of scoring PP for males" females .. and
diagnostic groups. The lowered PP figures reflect ambiguity in the Bcoring
directions, i.e." the absence of specified criteria to look for in the stories.
PP relia~ility figures are reported by diagnostic group because ambiguity in­
creases with-bizarreness present in the TAT stor,y. The selection of just what
to score becomes difficult as little in the protocol relates to the continuity
of the stor,y.
Validity
Table 8 presents the .means, ranges and standard deviations for eaoh
categor,y from all diagnostic groups on all samples. Validity was estimated by
a nonparametric" median, chi-square ana~sis (Tables 9, 10, 11). The statis­
tical fact of si~ficant differences between diagnostic groups does not
indicate the predictive efficiency of a scoring system. For this reason pre­
diction scores were developed by using as criteria (cut-off scores) the normal­
neurotic and n~urotic-psychotic medians for each sample (Table 12). The

.
relatively small differences between male and female samples permit use of
-

combined medians obtained 'from the total sample rather than separate cut-off
scores for each sex. These combined medians (rol,Jhded for convenient clinical
application) are 23 anq 15 fOf PO; 11 and 7 for PR; 2 and 6 for PP. PO and
PR scores ~ the nor.mal-n~urotic medians were given OJ scores between the
 -16­
Table 8
Means, Standard Deviations(SD) and Ranges for ~~le (M»)
Male Cross~validation (C) and Female (F) Validation
Sam/1es of Normal, Neurotic, and Psychotic
Groups on Each Scoring Category

~ategory Bean SD Range

M C F M C F 1-1 C -F

ro
Group: --

Normal 26.6 26.5 27.5 3.7 2.6 3.9 19-32 22-31 16-35
Neurotic - 20.8 18.5 18.5 4.2 3.2 4.3 12-29 11-24 10-25
Psychotic 13.2 10.8 8.5 4.1. 2.9 2.9 6-24 6-21 5-18­
PR
Group:
Normal 12.1 13.4 14.2 1.8 1.3 1.0 8-15 11-15 11-15
Neurotic. 9.8 8.8 9.7 2.2 1.5 1.7 ly-15 5-1.1 -5-12
Psychotic 4.9 5.2 5.4 5.. 8 1.6 1.9 ~12' 1-9 1...11
PP
Group:
Nonna1 1.0 ~3 .2 .5 1 •.3 1.1 0-6 0-6 0-13
Neurotic 5.9 3.8 6.1 2.7 4.3 . 6.0 0-17 0-29 0...30
Psychotic 12.1 5.0 a.5 9.1 6.0 6.6 1-43 - 0-40 0-29
 -17­
Table 9
Summary of Median Test Results on PO, FR."
PP Scores of l~ale Validation Sample,

Combined Above
Category 1,Iedian Hedian X2 p

PO

Group:
Normal 37.0
24.50 23.0 <.001
Neurotic 13.0
NomaJI.. 46.5
20.25 73.9 <,001
Psychotic: 3.5
Neurotic 40.8
16.94 39.9 <\001
Psychotic 9.2
PH.

. Group:
Normal 35,5
11.19 17.6 <"001
Neurotic 14.5
Normal 46.S
8.90 76.0 ~001
Psychotic. 3.2
Neurotic 42.7
7.6$ 50.1 ~001
Psychotic 7.3
,PP
Group:
Normal 12.6
1.90 24.6 4,001
Neurotic 37.4
Normal 7.7
2,83 47.9 <'001
Psychotic 42,3
Neurotic 17.9
7.37 S.l 4.01
Psychotic 32.1
 ·..1S­
Table 10
Summary of Median Test Results on FO, PR,

PP Seores of Female Validation Sample

Combined Above
Category Media.n }lIedian X2 p
PO

Group:
Normal 43.5
22.50 47.7 "'::'001
Neurotic 9.0
Nonna1 49.5
16.50 94.1 "'\001
Psychotic 1.0
Neurotic 44.7
12.10 59.3 <,001
Psychotic 6..2
PR

Group:
Normal 4S.2
11.90 ,49.5 <.001
Neurotic 14.1
Normal 50.0
1O.S4 96..1 <.001
Psychotic 1,,0
Neurotic 44.3
7~6S 33~9 <.001
Psychotic 15,S
PP
Group:
Normal 6,5
1.50 62.6 "''\001
Neurotic 46.0
Normal 7.1
1.30 5S.S < .001
Psychotic 45.4
Neurotic 23.$
6.S4 1.3
Psychotic 29.5
 -19­
Table 11

Summary of Median Test R9sults on PO, PR, PP

Scores of Male Cross-validation Sample

Combined Above
Category Median l<ledian X2 p

PO

Group:
Normal 29.0
23.00 52.3 <\001
Neurotic 1.0
Normal 30.0
21.50 58.0 <.001
Psychotic .5
Neurotic 28.0
14.00 45.1 <.001
Psychotic 2.0
m
Group:
Normal 29.8
11.07 58.0 <.601
Neurotic .3
Normal 30.0
9.50 56.1 <.001
Psychotic 1~0

Neurotic 29.0
7-.00 3·9.7 <.001
Psychotic 4.8
PP
Group:
. Normal 8.2
1.95 24.6 <.001
Neurotic 27.1
Normal 6.2
2.60 30.4 <.001
Psychotic 27.4
Neurotic 15.0
4.33 .6
Psychotic 18.0
 -20­
Table 12
Normal-neurotic and Neurotic-psychotic Medians for'Hale Validation,

lfule Cross-Validation (C), Female Validation, Total

11ale, and Total :f.fale and Female Sa.r.lples for

TAT Scoring Categories PO, FR, PP

Category Hedian
normal-neurotic Neurotic-psychotic
Fa

Sample:
1:1ale 24.5 16.9
Male (C) 2.3.0 14.0
Female 22.5 12.J.
Total I"fale 23.8 16.3
Total 11 & F 23.4 14.. 7
FR
Sample:
I-iale 11.. 2 7.7
Male (C) 11.1 7.0
Fefuale 11.9 7.7
Total Male 11.1 7.3
Total M & F 11.4 7.5
PP
Sample:
Male 1.9 7.4
Male (C) 1~9 . 4.3
Female 1.5 6.8
Total Male 1.9 6,2
- ,
Total M& F 1.8 6.4.
 -21­
, .
normal-neurotic and neurotic~psychotic medians were given 1; and scores bel~

the neurotic-psychotic medians were given 2" PP scores ~ the normal-

neurotic median were given O~ scores between the normal-neurotic median and
the neurotic-psychotic median were given 1; and scores above the neurotic­
psychotic median were given 2. Table 13 presents the percentages of ~s male.
(validation plus cross-validation samples) and female, in each diagnostic group
receiving scores of 0, 1, 2. This table can be used directly to evaluate the
pl'obability that a particular scored TAT record ("men translated into .prediction
scores) will fall into the nomal, neuroti'c, or psychotic group. This table
constitutes preliminary norms for these three TAT scori~g categories.
Past TAT res~arch (1) has indicated that length (numb~r of words) may be
related to objective sporing. The question of whether the median test differ­
ences were a result of length was raised in the male validation study" That is,
would the groups have been alike in FO scores had their proto~ols been of
equivalent length? The assumptions necessary for covarience adjustments are
not satisfied and a crude test which provides a correction
, for regression and
takes trend into account was used. A graphical procedure was employed analogous
to the median teet except that a kind of average regression line or IIsliding
dividing linelf was used in lieu of the median, Regression lines were plotted
for the three groups for FO on length, a line of split (sliding dividing line)
was made for each pair of groups, the number of caseB above and below were
counted, and chi~square applied. No.appreciable .differences in FO were found.
A less rigorous method would be to plot PO against length for the total sample,
draw a line fitting the medians of the columr.sand compare by chi-square the
proportion of the cases in each group falling, above the line of medians.
P.roduct~oment correlations were calcul3ted between scoring categor~es and
length for the male and female sar.J.ples (Table 14). The magnitude of the PO­
 ...22­
Table 13
,Pel'crentage of §.S in Each Group ReceiYing

Scores of 0, 1, 2 Q'n BolCh Category

Group' , Categor,r

PO Hi PP

Normal
Score:

,0 B2 B4 87
1 1B 16 ·12
2 0 0 1
Neurotio
Score:

0 17 14 26
1 6B 81 40
2 15 5 34
Psychotic
Score:

0 1 1 13
J. 16 29 42
2 83 70 45
 -23­
Table 14
Product-moment Correlations between Categories PO, PH,
-PP, and Lengtlrfor:Two- Sanip.l.(J5i.·¥a~;-<u:1d· Female,
Each of Three Groups, 50 ~s in Each Group

Length Category
PO ffi PP
Hale
Group:
Normal .23 .15 .16
Neurotic .52lH~ .12 .11
Psychotic .3011­ -.02 .21
Femnle
Group:
• Normal .•55** .10 -.00
Neurotic •34it­ .50** .40*11­

PSY'chotic .42*11­ .20 .39**

*Significant at the .05 level of

confidence.
*7rSignificant at the .01 level of
confidence.
 -24­
length correlations for the male and female samples do not· diffe"r to srv great
extent.. " The marked similarity of the respective distributions indicates that
the influence of length on median test differences for the female sample is
not important. Some PR-length and PP-length correlations are significant for '
the female sample. However, nei~her correlation for the normal group approaches
significance. This suggests that length does not influence the scoring cate­
gones ~ ~ but may be related to psychopathology. Again the magnitude of
the obtained correlations.in comparison with the magnitude of the chi-square
differences between groups provide~ evidence against any appreciable constant
effect on either PH or PP prediction scores.
Although consensus of experts has not considered intelligence to be
related to TAT scores, product-moment correlations were calculated between
scoring categories and intelli~nce as estimated by Wechsler-Bellevue, Fonn I,
I.q. scores (Table 15). The correlations b~een PO and PR scores and intelli­
gence scores for neurotics were significant at <.05. and,.... .05 levels of con­
fidence respectively. None of the correlations for the normal or psychotic
groups were significant. It is suggested that I.Q. scores and these TAT
scoring categories are not related per ~ but that those neurotics with higher
intelligence tend to be more in contact and thus obtain better TAT scores,.

T Soores
Severa1 problems are involved in use of Table 13 as preliminary nor.me for
these TAT semi ng categor.i. es. The complexity of the clerical process, the absenoe
of uniform procedure, and the use of unequal score units makes mandatory a more
communicable method of presenting normativ~ data. For these reasons conversion
to T-score
... equivalents was undertaken.
. ..

T-scores assume a standard group of

-.
SSt Although the total number of £s
remains relat.ively small (N-390) and may not be representative of IInormal" or
 -25­
Table 15
Product-moment ·e~elations between
PO, PR, PP and Intelligence Test
Scores for Three Female Groups

"

Intelligence Categol!Y'
PO FR PP
Group:
Norma1'(N;:50) .02 -.04 .. 06
Neurotic (N=34) .3LVt .31 .05
Psychot~c (N=40) .22 .23 .. 00

*Significant at the .05 ::Level of

cOnfidence.
 -26­
clinical populations over a broad range of situations, the advantages of T-
scores are recognized. Primarily, however, the opportunity for maximizing
differences between groups by use of combined scores was obtained. Thus, these
scores when no~~lized bec~ne units corillnon to psychological measurement and
their meaning is enhanced.

Table 16 presents the T-score equivalents for each TAT scoring catego~.
,
Table 17 contains T-score percentages of normal, neurotic, and psychotic s~)les

for each scoring categorJ. It ~dll be noted that Tables 13 and 17 present
highly similar percentage figures, differing only as a function of ehoiee
of cut-off points. BOliever, when T-scores are added to provide the combinations
for Fa and PR, PO and PP, f,R and PP, and PO, PR, PP, striking differences occur
in the predictive efficiency of the scoring categories. Tables IB, 19, 20, 21
provide this informau on. "lhen ro and PI' T-scores are combined (Table 1$), 79
per cent of normal Ss fall between scores of 112 and 145; BB percent of neurotic
§.S fall betvleen B9 and lll; and 83 per cent of psychotic' §.S fall between 49 and
B8. Combinations of PO and PP (Table 19) and PR and P'l" (Table 20) do not pro­
vide any increments to prediction. vfuen all three scoring categories are com­
bined (Table 21), 8B per cent of normal ~s obtain combined T-scores'of 166-to
203; Bl per cent of neurotic ~s obtain scores between 134-165; ~nd 79 per cent
of psychotic ~s obtain scores between 70 and 133.
It is ,suggested that scores from each categorJ be transformed into T~score

equivalents (Table 16), these T-scores added, and Table 21 be used directly to
evaluate the probability of accurate diagnostic placement of a given individual

Discussion
'rhis manual has IJresented TAT scoring categories which may be reliably
sCf)red b7 naive scorers and which provide "correct" pr~diction of a signifi­
 -27­

Table 16

T Scores for Categories PO, PR" pp -

T Score Ca.tegory ­
ro FR pp

78 35-37

72 32-34

67 15

65 29-31

62 14

59 26-2S
53 13 0.-:2

56 12

55 23-25

53 11

52 20-22

51 lO
50 3-5

49 17-19 9

47 8

46 14-16

45 7 6-8

43 11-13 6

42 9-11

40 5

39 12-14

38 8-10

37 4 15-17

35 18-20

33 3

32 5-7 21-23

30 2 24-26

-28 27-29

26 1 30-35

2; 36-38

24 39-41

19 0 42-44

 ~~

Table 17
T Score Percentages of Normal1 Neurotic and
Psychotic ~s for Each Scoring Categor,y

T So~e Normal Neurotic PSY~l1otic

PO FR 'pp 00 FR 'PP ro PH pp

5;.w.!fS 88 84 87 24 14 25 2 1 13
46;.54 12 16 g 65 71 22 18 12 23
19-45 0 0 5 11 15 53 80 87 64

 Table 18
T Score Pereentages 01 Normal, Neurotic and Psychotic

§.s for Scoring Categories PO and FR Combined

T Score NOrmal Neurotic Psychotic
112-145 79 6 0

B9-l11 21 BS 17
49-8B 0 6 B.3
Table 19
T Score Percentages ot-Normalj Neurotic and Psychotic
§.S for Scoring Categories PO and PP Combined
T Score Normal Neurotic Psychotic'
109-136 92 IS 2
89-108 8 62 27
49-88 0 20 71
Table 20

T Score Percentages of Normal, Neurotic and Psychotic

~s for Scoring Categories PR and PP Combined

• !

T Score Normal Neurotic Psychotic

10B-125 92 14 1

91-107 $ 65 2.3
38-90 0 21 76
Table 21
T Score Percentages o£ Normal, Neurotic and Psychotic
§.s £or Scoring Categories PO, FR., PP Combined
T Score Normal Neurotic Psychotic
166-203 8B 9 1

134.-165 12 B1 20
70-133 o 10 79
cant percentage of three diagnostic groups. Hmiever, the information actually
obtained by this scoring system goes consiqerably beyond preqiction of clinical
diagnosis, The scores of an §. are believed to represent IIdegree of psychiatric
illness,. II Thus, any expectation ot 100 per cent d;i.stinction between groups
would not be supported,
Mental illness, as tapped by this system, consists in deviations fxom
normative TAT behavior and represents changes in subjective, internalized
meaning qystems called IIrealityll. Certain concomitants of mental illness are
emphasized bY. this system: (a) awareness of reality is diminished; (b) ex­
perience.can be organized with difficulty if at all; (c) the desire to giye
an acceptable account of oneself diminishes. These appear as attributes
of a 108s of psychic energy necessa~:'y for optimal individual function.
The manual can be considered an enterprise preliminary to the major
responsibility of any projective technique, i.~., validitY2'
 . I

-31­

References
1. Dana, R. H. The Thematic Apperception Test applied to an experiment
in perceptiorl and Personality. Unpublished bachelor's thesis, Princeton
Uitl.v., 1949~
2~ Dana,. Rs H~ The· diagnostic efficacy of: a theoretically d~rived objeet:i.ve
s?oring 5,rstem f~r the Thematic Apperception T~st'· Unpublished doct~rts
thesi5; U~~i ot,!lllnoiB; 1953•.
3, Dana, R~ H, Per~onality Orientation! an organizational focus for
. ! i ' ·f •
durrent researohj i!,.. Pa.y.ch,ol. I 1954, 2L 139":150,
4, Dana~ .R~ iIj .ciiIiic~l diagnosis and objective TAT scoring., ~... abno~,

5. Dana, R. 'H. Ro~M~htich sdbrer reliability. .~,.4:h, PSlcholO 1955,

1l, 401-403.

6. Dana, R. H. The objectification-of projective t~cihniques: rationale.

Pgrcho1. Rep., 1955, !, 93-102.
7. Dana, R. H~ ~election of abbreviated TAT sets. ~4~. Ps~chol"

in press ..

8. 'Dana, R. H, Cross-validation of objective TAT scoring. ~. consult.

. .
POlchol., in press.
9. Dana, R. H. An application of objective TAT scoring. !l..~. ~.,

in press,
10. Dana, R. H. Norms for three aspects of TAT behavior. !l.. gen. Poychol.
in press.
11~ Fleming, Edith A descriptive analysis of responses in the Thematic
A:'perception Tost. U'"publlshed master l s thesis, Univ. of Pittsburgh,
1946.
 -32­

Appendix A

Score sheet, male

Score sheet, female
 TAT Score .Sheet: Male

Perceptual 'Organization (po), Perceptual Range (ffi), Perceptual Personalization (pP)

Nam.e~ __~_ Age_

ro PR PP

Component Card Card Criteria (List. 'bjr card H).

Tot....
- - -
CD
1
2 o a. Family: .young girl, wanan,
activity specified; adult·male.
PB

PE
i
B b. Fields or· farm.
c. Books or school.

FE
II
I
1
3
§
.
d. Figure, sex and. age specified.
~. Emotions noted.
f. Activity specified.
z -
I
4 D' g. i4'alej emotions noted, activity

"­

a
specified.

T
h. Woman; activity specified.
i •. Conflict or cooperation.
o
Total N
6 n j. l'ianj emotions noted, activity
specified.
Total Add..
- FJ
_
k. Woman;' emotions noted.
1. Personality referrent.

7 C::lm. Older male, activity specified,

. relationship specified.

El
n. Male, emotions noted.

o. Personality referrent.

Sum T
[J T ·cr TEl Scorer_________________
 "

TAT Score Sheet: Fema~e

'Perceptual Organization (PO), Perceptua~ Range (FR), Perceptual Personalization (PP)

Name____________ _______ _ Age

i

ro PH. pp

Component Card Card Criter4 (List by card if)

Tot.
- "" ..,. 6-
0
CD 2
'a a" Family: young ~rl, activity
specified; "TOmanj adult iIla.le.
b. Fields or farm. ,'•..

·
"

Fa c. Books or school.
FE

8
3 d. Female.
e. Emotions noted; activity spec.
FE f. Story; death" Il1urder, illness,
" frustration.
f .' ...._------- - - _ .. _-­
4 0 g. Male; emotions noted; activity
._-­ ---­

T specified.

o B h. ';ioman; activity specified.

i. Conflict or cooperation.

Tota~ N I
Total Add..
6 § j. 14aJ.e, activity indicated.
k. Female, emotions noted.
, . ,, 1. Relationship indicated"

7 I I m. Adult female" activity S:)60 .. ,

emotions noted.
lin. Child, female, e.'notions noted.
o. Relationship specified•
Sum T
o ...
TO T
r -,----.
1-1. Scorer _ _ _ _ _ __