~w-vuv—r-m...-n_q,.-.w ‘
1

AN EVALUATION OF THE WHITE SPACE
RESPONSE ON THE RORSCHACH
AS FIGURE-GROUND REVERSAL AND
INTELLECTUAL OPPOSITION

Thesis fer the Degree of Ph. D.
MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE
William D. (Nelson
1954

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled

AN EVJLLUAT N OF 1 TE Will TE 3? “CE 3133037523
012 IKE RQASCLLLCH AS FIGURE-GROUND IZWJE'RM
.113) IICTELLECTUAL GE-‘PCSITI ON

presented by

Hi lliam D. Ifel son

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

'3 *‘ ~ ,
#22; degree in My

 

Major professor

October 28, 1954
Date

 

0-169

 

 

 

 

 

 

An Evaluation of the White Space Response
on the Rorschach as Figure-Ground.Reversal

and Intellectual Opposition

By :1".
William D‘i" Nelson

» A THESIS
Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of Michigan
State College of Agriculture and Applied Science
in partial fulfillment of the requirements

for the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Psychology

1951+

355515

An Evaluation of the White Space Response
on the Rorschach as Figure-Ground.Reversal

and Intellectual Opposition

William DCL‘LNeleon

. A THESIS
Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of Michigan
State College of Agriculture and Applied Science
in partial fulfillment of the requirements

for the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
Department of Psychology

1954

 

 

This study was designed to test the validity of
two major hypotheses concerning the Rorschach white
Space reaponse.

One hypothesis was based on a common assumption
that the white space represents a reversal of figure
and ground and therefore has face validity on the basis
of its being the “opposite" of the usual percept.

The second major hypothesis stemmed from a re-
cent interpretation of the white space response made
by Klopfer, et. al. This interpretation placed the
opposition associated with S by most authors in the
intellectual sphere as opposed to purely emotional

aggression.

The following hypotheses were submitted to ex- I

perimental test: I

I. The perception of white space on the Rorschach I
test is related to a tendency to reverse figure I
and ground.

II. The perception of Primary S in the Rorschach is
qualitatively different from the perception of
Secondary S.

III. The use of white space in the Rorschach test re- l
fleets an intellectual opposition. I

Sixty open ward patients of a neuropsychiatric

hospital were used as subjects for this investigation. I

 

One group was composed of 20 individuals who produced
Primary S in the Rorschach. The second group of 20
produced no S in the Rorschach and were matched in-
dividually with the Primary S group on the basis of
age, intelligence and diagnosis. The third group of 20
was composed of individuals who produced Secondary but
no Primary S in the Rorschach.

The Rosenzweig Picture-Frustration Study, on the
basis of certain characteristics of the test as well as
the results of research with it, was used as a measure
of intellectual opposition. A series of cards on the
order of Rubin's vase-face reversal of figure and ground
were used to measure the tendency to reverse figure and
ground. The subjects were tested individually with the
Rorschach, P-F Study and figure-ground cards, in that
order. The results of the investigation failed to support
the hypothesis that 8 reflects an intellectual type of
opposition as measured by the P-F Study. However, the
hypothesis that S is related to a tendency to reverse
figure and ground was supported. The results failed to
demonstrate that Primary S and Secondary S are qualitative-
1y different although there was found a trend in the
direction of a closer relation between the tendency to

reverse figure and ground and Primary S.

 

In discussing the results of the investigation
the basic interpretation of the white space was questioned
and an alternative hypothesis suggested. That is, the
perception of white space is indicative of flexibility.
The need for further research in this area was pointed
out and one possible means of approach was outlined.
Some of the possible implications of such an investi-

gation were also mentioned.

 

.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The author is deeply indebted to a great number of
pe0ple. Without them this project would not have been
possible. Primary debts of gratitude are to Drs. G. M.
Gilbert and Paul Greenberg.

As Chairman of the Guidance Committee, Dr. Gilbert
provided continuous encouragement and constructive criti-
cism and repeatedly demonstrated a great deal of under-
standing.

As Director of Psychological Research at the
Veterans Administration HOSpital in Battle Creek, Michigan,
Dr. Greenberg generously contributed his time in dis—
cussion of many aspects of the project.

Others serving on the Guidance Committee who
contributed constructive criticisms were Drs. Albert I.
Rabin, Alfred G. Dietze and Chester A. Lawson. Drs. J.
D. Birch and David Pearl were very helpful in the develop-
ment of the statistical analyses of the data. Dr. S. G.
Marino contributed much to the translation of foreign
articles.

The author is indebted to Amedeo Dalla Volta for
the use of several figure-ground reversals and to Mrs.
Edward Lovinger and Joseph Grace for their contributions
in the construction of other figure-ground reversals.

Finally, there is the authors wife, Arlene, whose

contributions were innumerable.
ii

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
LiSt Of Tables 0 O O o O O O O O O O O O O 0 0

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Validation Studies of the White Space Response.

The White Space Response and Intellectual
Opposition. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

The White Space Response and Reversal of
Figure and Ground . . . . . . . . . .... . . .

HypOthesee . g o e o e e e o e e o o o e e e e 0 ¢

MethOdOlogy. e o 0 e 0 e o 0 e o O o e e 0 e e e e
SubJGCtse e e e e o o e e e e e e e e e e 0 o 0

Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Procedure 0 e 0 0 e 0 e e o 0 e o O o e e 0 e O

Regu1t6. . O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O O 0

Discussion of Results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Implications for Further Research. . . . . . . . .

Summary and Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Selected References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Appendices o o e o e e e O o o e 0 e e e e o O 0

iii

Page
11

iv

13

16

22

2h
24

25
32

38

50

59

61

65

70

 

Table

ha

7a

LIST OF TABLES

Comparison of Grou s on Intelligence
(Wechsler-Bellevuef and Age. . . . . . . . . . . .

Diagnostic Characteristics of the Groups . . . . . .

Number of Subjects in the Primary and No S
Groups whose Reversals Exceed their Match in
the Comparison Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Number of Subjects in Primary and Secondary S
Groups Perceiving Figure—Ground Reversals. . . . . .

Comparison of Number of Primary S and the Perception
of Figure-Ground Reversals . . . . . . . . . . . .

Number of Subjects in Secondary and No S Groups
Perceiving Figure-Ground Reversals . . . . . . . . .

Number of Subjects in each Group whose Perception
of Internal Figures Exceed that of their Match in
the Comparison Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Comparison of Matched Pairs in Terms of Highest
Scores on the Major Scoring Categories of the
P-FStud-YOOOOOOO¢0eoeeeeeeo.eOe

Comparison of Individuals with Two or More Primary
S and their Matched Pairs in Terms of High.Scores
0n the P‘F StUdy e e o o o o e e e e o o o e e e o 0

Comparison of Obtained and.Expected Degree of
Agreement Between Peak Scores in the P-F Study
and Experience Balance in the Rorschach. . . . . . .

iv

Page

26

27

39

#1

41

“3

#4

Q6

’49

 

..............

.......

Introduction

The Rorschach test has emerged as one of the most
popular projective techniques in contemporary psychology.
Along with its rise in popularity as a clinical tool it
has served as the stimulus for an increasing amount of
research. However, most of this research has been of a
clinical and normative nature. Only recently, as Williams
points out (52), have experimental investigations appeared
which critically examine the assumptions underlying the
Rorschach stimulus variables as well as the relation be-
tween response and personality. Critical examinations of
the many premises and assumptions upon which the Rorschach
is based should serve to clarify its scientific status.

In addition, they may more clearly identify the basic
psychological processes which underlie the personality
structure as it is projected in a Rorschach protocol.

A common experimental approach in Rorschach in-
vestigation involves the systematic manipulation of stim-
ulus variables such as color, form, shading, etc. By this
means more precise information is gained concerning the
relationship between the stimulus variables and the vari-
ous types of responses they provoke. For example, Balloch
(2) investigated various determinants involving shading

by varying the degrees of shading contrast in a group of

- 2 -

inkblots. Lazarus (31) and Siipola, et. al. (#6) studied
the influence of color in the Rorschach by comparing
responses to color cards with reaponses to achromatic
reproductions of the same card. Rabin and Sanderson (39)
subjected some of the assumptions underlying “color shock“
to test by varying the order of presentation of the cards.
The present investigation is directed toward a
study of the stimulus and interpretive aspects of a type
of reaponse about Which relatively little is known - the
white space response. Although the white space reaponse
has been accorded considerable theoretical discussion
there appears to be a surprising lack of studies dealing
primarily with it. One apparent reason for the lack of
studies is the fact that this type of response does not
occur as frequently as other responses in the test. This
should not, however, detract from its importance nor the
need to learn more about it. The need to subject this
area to eXperimental investigation is felt to be partic-
ularly vital since the assumptions underlying its stimulus
value and the type of behavior it is believed to represent
have been clearly specified (6, 9, 25). Thus, the assump-
tion that the white space response represents figure-ground

reversal and denotes oppositional qualities, rather

_.3..

uncritically accepted heretofore, would seem to demand
experimental validation. It is with this problem that
the present investigation is concerned.

Rorschach (41; p.39) originally defined the white
space reaponse as "those answers in which the white
spaces are interpreted rather than the black or colored
parts of the figure which surround them." Since Ror-
schach's original formulation, the definition of the "S“
(Space) response has been considerably expanded. Beck
(5), for example, describes four varieties of the S re-
sponse viz. major and minor white Spaces perceived as
units and major and minor white spaces perceived in con-
junction with an adjacent inked area. Hereinafter the
first two varieties (white space perceived as a unit) will
be termed “Primary S" while the last two varieties will be
termed "Secondary S.”

There is considerable disagreement regarding the
significance of the two major types of S response. Beck
(5) does not distinguish between Primary and Secondary S,
with reapect to interpretation, but holds to the view
that both types reflect the same psychological process.
Buhler, Buhler and Lefever (10) and Munroe (35) give a

weight of one-half to Secondary S responses while KlOpfer

-1...

and Kelly (25) discourage the use of Secondary S in the
scoring summary entirely. Hertz (20) scores both normal
"S” and rare “s“ details and adds an O (oligOphrenic)
when space is associated with a rare detail. Phillips
and.Smith (37) use two symbols to indicate use of white
space, s, when space is the dominant content or figure
and,§ when space plays a minor role in the percept.

Rorschach (#1) held that S always reflects an
oppositional trend of some sort. This basic opposition
may be expressed behaviorally in a variety of ways. For
Rorschach, the mode of expression of opposition is con-
tingent upon the ratio of movement responses to color
responses (Experience Balance). If color (0) outweights
movement (M) the opposition is said to be directed out-
ward against the environment in the form of stubborness,
defiance, etc. If C and M are equal, the opposition may
be directed against the subjects' own consciousness and
find expression in doubt, indecision, vacillation, etc.
When M is greater than C the opposition is directed against
the subjects' inner life and results in feelings of in-
sufficiency, self-distrust, self-criticism, etc.

Beck adheres very closely to Rorschach's inter-

pretations of S and adds that "generically it consists

 

 

-5...

fundamentally of self will" (6; p.47). Other authors
also accept Rorschach's "opposition“ hypothesis (7, 9,
10, 33, 38, #0). Some writers, however, emphasize the
importance of analyzing the response with reference to
such factors as location, position in association, content
and associative elaborations when making this interpre-
tation (9, 33. 37). The manner in which Opposition trends“
are expressed is also said to vary with the different
personality structures in which S is found. Beck (6;
p.47) gives one of the most concise and complete descrip-
tions of the various interpretations of S. In the normal,
intelligent individual S stands for "resolution" and "per-
severence“ while in the less intelligent or less educated
it means "contumacy" and “obstinacy.” In psychopaths the
opposition is directed against society in the form of
“destructive behavior." A feebleminded person with S
“will be hard to manage." When associated with schizo-
phrenia S indicates extreme negativism, while in the
paranoid patient it represents rigid adherence to de-
lusions.

Klopfer, et. al., in a recent publication (26),
offer a unique interpretation of the white Space response.

These authors hold that S represents Opposition in the

- 6 -

intellectual sphere. It involves “a putting of the self
across; it is the competitive or self-assertive aspect of
intellectuality“ (26; p.309).

In summary, the literature concerning the meaning
of the white space response provides a basis for two gen-
eral statements. First, there is general agreement that
S represents some type of Oppositional tendency. Second,
there is little agreement concerning the significance of
one type of S response as Opposed to another.

Validation Studies
of the White Spgpe Respgnse

 

Attempts to validate the clinical hunches and
intuitions concerning white space reaponse have met with
varying degrees of success. Several Rorschach investi-
gations have included an analysis of the S response. In
Rapaport's study (40) S was highest in the Paranoid Con—
dition group, but was also relatively freQuent in the
Over-Ideational PreschiZOphrenic and.Mixed Neurotics -
groups who show the greatest wealth and intensity of
associative processes. Buhler, Buhler and Lefever (10)
found a larger number of S responses in the normal group
and the lowest number in the psychotic group. The authors
attempt to explain these contradictory findings by stating

that many S responses were given by normals who were over-

- 7 -

compliant and wanted to be accepted. In these cases,
therefore, the Opposition and independence is concealed.
Thetford, Molish, and Beck (47) found significantly fewer
Secondary S, but not Primary S, in children in the latency
period when compared with children in the prepubescent
and adolescent periods. They consider these findings as
support for the view that S is related to self-will.

Ford (15) also found that S reaponses increase gradually
with age. In a careful study of subjects producing S
responses, Vernon (48) found no preponderance of contra-
suggestibility. However, the author states that these
subjects might be considered more emotional and erratic
than those not producing S. Rosen (42) studied the
records of psychiatric patients and found significantly
fewer Primary S in the case of patients diagnosed as
psychopaths than in non-psychOpaths. Rosen points out
that Boss's study,1 in which a close relationship between
S and degree of antisocial psychopathy is reported, was
contaminated by the use of the Rorschach as one of the
instruments to rate the degree of psychOpathy. Along the

same line, Schachtel (44) found a significantly greater

 

‘IBoss's article was not read for the purpose of
this study.

 

- 8 -

number of S responses among a group of 500 non-delinquent
adolescents than among a group of 500 delinquent adol-
escents.

Pattie (36; p.164) was unable to find any support
for the theory “that white space responses and color re-
eponses are indicators of outwardly directed hostility"
in the Rorschach responses in a group of subjects in
which hostility was hypnotically induced.

There have been three major studies which have
dealt exclusively with the white space response (3, 14,
23, 24). In Fonda's study (14) the standard group.Ror-
schach and Harrower's parallel series were administered
to a group of 150 college students. The subjects were
also required to complete two questionnaires; the
GuilfordéMartin Personnel Inventory and Inventory of
Factors GAMIN. Both questionnaires require an answer
of ”yes", “no" or “7". The author assumed that a gener~
alized Opposition tendency would be reflected in a con-
sistent tendency to use the "?" answer. In this case the
subject is either unable (indecisive) or unwilling (con-
trary) to give a definite answer. Fonda also was inter-
ested in the relation between 3 response and Factors I

(inferiority feelings), Co (cooperativeness) and Ag

- 9 -

(agreeableness). While none of the correlations between
these factors and S were significant the author found a
highly significant relation between S and a tendency to
give ”?“ answers on the questionnaires. Fonda offers
these findings as partial confirmation of the Opposition
hypothesis to the extent that the tendency to give “?”
answers reflects indecisiveness or contrariness.

In a study by Ingram (23, 24) it was assumed that
the various ways in which S is expressed reflects some
kind of aggressive behavior. It was hypothesized.that
subjects with S in their Rorschach protocols should re-
spond with more aggressive behavior in a frustrating
situation than subjects without S. Eight college students
who produced two or more Primary S and eight students who
produced no S were subjected to two frustrating situations,
intellectual and interpersonal. The first was a problem-
solving situation and the second an interview situation.
After taking the Rorschach, performing with the puzzle
and completing a Questionnaire the students were told
that there was not much hope for them to make the grade.
Five-paint scales of aggression (assertion, initiative,
persistence, resistance and hostility) and the assumed

Opposites (cooperation and rapport) were constructed.

-10..

A group of experts rated the subjects on these scales on
the basis of the Rorschach protocols. The subjects were
also rated on the scales in each of the frustrating situ-
ations by independent judges. The results were somewhat
inconsistent. In the interview situation the S group was
rated as exhibiting more hostility but less resistance,
more initiative and more OOOperation and rapport. The
author concludes that the S group was more aggressive in
an interactive, participatory manner. In the puzzle
situation the S group exhibited less hostility and less
assertion. The Rorschach judges were in close agreement
in rating the subjects on the various scales. However,
there was little agreement between the ratings of the
Rorschach judges and the ratings of subjects in the two
frustrating situations.

In a study by Bandura (3), teachers ratings were
the independent criteria used to test the validity of the
Oppositional interpretation of the white Space response.
Fifty-nine high school students were rated by several
teachers on 5 point scales of negativism, assertiveness,
inadequacy feelings and self-distrust. The scales were
made up of simple descriptions of observable behavior.
The subjects were administered the Rorschach individually

- 11 -

and were required to view each card for a four minute
period. Primary S responses were given a weight of l
and Secondary S reaponses a weight of .5. Bandura sub-
jected the following hypotheses to test:

a. A significant and positive re»
lationship exists between the
number of S reaponses and rat-
ings of "negativism" in extra—
tensive subjects.

b. A significant and positive re-
lationship exists between the
number of S responses and rat-
ings of “inadequacy" in intro-
versive subjects.

c. There is no systematic relation~
ship between ratings of “inn
adequacy“ and the number Of S
responses in extratensive sub-
jects and, similarly, there is
no systematic relationship be-
tween ratings of “negativism”

and the number of S reaponses
in introversive subjects.

(3; pps. 17, 18)
The author correlated the number of S with the averages
of the ratings on each of the four behavioral scales
for each subject. No significant differences existed
between the two types of Experience Balance and the
correlations with the rating scales. When the data for
the extratensive and introversive subjects were combined,

the author found a small but significant correlation of

f .35 between number of S responses and ratings on the

-12-

negativism scale. Bandura concludes that his results
offer partial corroboration of the “Oppositional ten-
dency" hypothesis. He suggests that the inference that
inadequacy and self-distrust feelings are reflected in
the S response should be discontinued. He also Questions
the usefulness of the experience type classification in
the interpretation of the 8 response.

Bandura (4) was also interested in the relation
of white space to perceptual processes. Using the Necker
Cube, he found a positive relation between S and the rate
of alternation of visual perspective. Since he also found
a high correlation between rate of alternation on the
Necker Cube and.Rubin's vase-face reversal, he assumed
that the Necker Cube offered a measure of the tendency
to reverse figure and ground. However, this is not the
case. Once the subject is informed of the vase and face
aspects of the card, the alternating effect becomes in-
voluntary. Bandura, therefore, only demonstrated that
the Necker Cube and Rubin's vase-face reversal were both
adequate instruments for the investigation of the rate of
alternation of perspective.

It can be seen that investigations into the mean-

ing of the white space response have resulted in a number

 

- 13 -

of inconsistencies and contradictions. This variability
can, in part, be explained on the basis of the limit-
ations of the studies. Some of these investigations in-
volved as few as four subjects. Some used no control
group for comparison purposes. Others, in attempting to
validate theory, failed to show cognizance of the fact
that a variety of specific types of behavior would be
predicted according to theory. Still others failed to
discriminate between Primary and Secondary S or combined
them in an arbitrary fashion.

For the most part, studies concerned with the
white space response have produced negative results as
far as confirmation of theory is concerned. A few studies
have concluded that the results offered partial corrober-
ation of the theory but in general it appears that there
has been no adequate substantiation of the Rorschach
hypotheses relating to the white Space response.

,The Whgte Space Respongg
,gpd Intellectual Oppqggtion

Investigations directed toward the validation
of the white space response have, to date, dealt prim-
arily with overt emotional aggression or hostility.

Such an approach has stemmed from Rorschach's original

interpretation concerning the white space response.

- 14 -

In contrast to Rorschach's formulation, Klopfer
and.Kelly suggest that "purely emotional aggression is
more likely to be represented by a predominance of CF
over FC and FM over M responses." (25; p. 266) This
hypothesis is further eXpanded in a more recent publication
(26). Klopfer, et. al. hypothesize that 8 reflects an
intellectual type of opposition involving competition
and self-assertiveness.

The interpretation of intellectual Opposition
is further elaborated on the basis of the type of Ex-
perience Balance associated with S. When associated
with an extratensive Experience Balance it is hypoth-
esized that S implies Opposition directed outward toward
the environment. This Opposition may be expressed in
the form of argumentativeness and selfuassertion. When
S is associated with an introversive Experience Balance
it is believed that Opposition is directed toward the
self. The person expects too much of himself. It might
be said that the discrepancy between his level of aSpir-
ation and.his ability is too great. As a consequence,
the individual feels inadequate and self-critical. The
authors believe that these feelings of inadeQuacy differ

"... from the vague, diffuse kind of inadequacy which is

- 15 -

more likely to be represented by K and k responses than
by S“ (26; p. 310) in that they are consciously recognized.
Finally, if S is associated with an ambiequal Experience
Balance it is believed to indicate ambivalence and doubt.
The term “Opposition”, as it is used by Klopfer,
et. al., is not descriptive of one particular type of
behavior. Rather, as indicated above, the term encom-
passes a number of comparatively unique types of behavior.
The distinction between emotional and intellectual
, Opposition is not clearcut. It is difficult to conceive
of any type of Opposition as devoid Of emotional compon-
ents. Rather, intellectual opposition might be viewed
as a type of behavior in which the threat to the ego,
and consequently the emotional accompaniments, are mini-
mized. Severe frustration or threat to the ego is likely
to stimulate some type of global, emotion-laden reaction
in most people. Intellectual Opposition, on the other
hand, may find expression in situations in which the ego
is not subjected to severe threat. Thus an individual
may be able to identify with expressions of aggression
in others and not be able to express that aggression him-
self. Or he may be able to express his opposition in
situations in which the repercussions of his behavior

are not threatening to him.

 

- 16 -

Given such a situation, it would be expected
that individuals who perceived S in the Rorschach would
react in a consistent and exaggerated manner following
the formulation outlined above. That is, one individual
may react with expressions of aggression such as argu-
mentativeness, blaming others, sarcasm, self-assertiveness,
etc. Another may consistently reflect his feelings of
inadequacy by blaming himself for extenuating circum-
stances, being apologetic, etc. A third may express his
ambivalence and doubt by passive reactions in which blame
is avoided, no solution offered, etc.

For the purpose of validating the meaning of the
white epace response, the particular formulation of S as
intellectual Opposition, made by Klopfer, et. al., was
selected because it was the most recent formulation and
lent itself to definitive predictions.

The White Spgce Reaponse
gpg Reversal of Figpze and Ground

Piotrowski (38) states that Rorschach based his
method on a number of observations regarding perception,
particularly visual perception. In fact, his method is
termed "a diagnostic test based on perception" or "the

form interpretation test" (41). Not the least of these

- 17 -

observations is the fact that perception is selective in
nature. That is, it involves psychological as well as
anatomical and physiological aSpects of the perceiver.
According to Piotrowski, the basic assumption of Ror-
schach's method is that there is a close correSpondence
between an individual's percepts and the manner in which
he deals with his environment.

If this basic assumption is accepted, it may then
be asked how Opposition trends might be reflected in the
perception of white space. It is generally assumed that
an individual who utilizes the white space, at least the
Primary S, is reversing the ”figure” and “ground" (5, 6,
9, 25, 26, 33, 40). That is, the individual uses the
white or non—inked area as a stimulus for a percept while
the inked area serves as a background. The Oppositional
quality of this type of percept is said to lie in the
fact that it represents an unusual approach in the sense
that the instructions which direct attention to the blot
are ignored and the white background (the “Opposite”) is
employed in the develOpment of the percept (25, 26, 40,
48).

If S reflects a consistent manner in which an

individual deals with his environment, it must also

 

- 18 -

reflect a consistent mode of perceiving that environment.
Therefore, it must be demonstrated that the perceptual
process involved in the utilization of S is not unique
to the Rorschach before any interpretive significance
can be attributed to it. The perceptual process in-
volved in the perception of S is assumed to be a re-
versal of figure and ground. If a reversal of figure
and ground is associated with the use of white space in
the Rorschach, it may be expected that individuals who
use the S reaponse, in contrast to those who do not,
would also perceive more reversals in a pure figure-
ground experiment. Such a hypothesis has been suggest-
ed by Rapaport (40) and Dalla Volta (11).

The figure-ground phenomenon has been accorded
primary significance in Gestalt psychology. In Gestalt
theory it is considered a fundamental type of mental
structure (27, 50). The phenomenon gained impetus
through the pioneer work of Rubin. Since Rubin's
original work, the figure-ground structure has been
subjected to varied analyses by a number of investiga-
tions (16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 27, 28, 29, #9, so, 51).

The majority of these investigations are concerned with
the perception of one part of the stimulus as figure as

Opposed to the other. Summarizing the findings of various

- 19 -

investigations, the following conditions have been found

to influence the perception of a figure:

1.

Size comparison. (Generally the
smaller area will be perceived
as figure.)

Enclosure or partial enclosure.
(Aids figure and is more in-
fluential than size of area.)

Articulation.

Simplicity Of shape.

Symmetry.

Brightness gradient. (The
least bright area has a
greater tendency to be per-
ceived as figure.)

Previous percepts. (In a
series of ambiguous figures,
the aspect first seen will in-
fluence the next.)

In most of these investigations the subjects

were trained observers who were directed to attend to

certain aspects of the stimulus. The results were based

on subjective reports and.conclusions were drawn on the

basis of a majority of judgments in one direction. Little

attention, until recently was paid to the individual

differences in the perception of figure and ground.

In relatively recent studies of the figure-ground

relationship there has been noted a tendency for some

- 20 -

individuals to invert the figure and ground more readily
than others. Lapi (30) found that most subjects require
some kind of set, such as to use their imagination, be-
fore they could perceive a reversal. However, he was
unable to explain the fact that about five percent of
his subjects were able to distinguish a white figure on
a black ground (the most difficult) more readily than
vice-verse. Dalla Volta (11) considers the reversal
tendency as a definite symptom and suggests that it may
be diagnostic of schizoid personality and certain types
of schizophrenia. However, Loeb (32) was unable to find
any significant differences in the tendency to reverse
figure and ground between a large group of mental
patients and a group of normals. He concluded that

such a tendency can not be accorded pathological sig-
nificance. Scharmann (45) attempts to explain this
tendency on the basis of flexibility of intellectual

and apperceptive processes.

The results Of investigations into figure-ground
perception suggest that the various types of S response
may differ in the degree to which they approximate a
pure inversion of figure and ground. The so-called

I'true reversal of figure and ground“ such as the "top”

- 21 -

in Card II of the Rorschach actually contains elements
which contribute to the perception of a figure. It is
enclosed and smaller than the I'ground" which surrounds
it. It might then be more accurately termed a figure
within a figure. Dalla Volta (ll) contends, however,
that this type of percept is 'phenomenologically“
equivalent to an inversion of figure and ground. There
is a second type of Primary S which may accurately be
described as a reversal of figure and ground. In this
case the contour of the inked area serves as a partial
but not complete contour for the white space percept.
An example would be a profile perceived in the white
space adjacent to an inked area. In the case of the
Secondary S response there does not exist a percept
distinct from that which is usually perceived. The
inked area is incorporated as part of the figure. In
fact, it is Often the most dominant part of the figure,
rather than the ground. The Secondary S response
approximates an inversion of figure and ground only by
the fact that part of the usual ground is incorporated
in the percept. The Secondary S response, therefore,

appears to be a distinctly different type of percept.

 

Hypotheses

On the basis of the above discussion the follow-

ing hypotheses may be made:

I.

II.

III.

The perception of white space on the Rorschach
test is related to a tendency to reverse figure
and ground.

A. Individuals who perceive Primary S in the
Rorschach will produce a significantly
greater number of reversals in a figure-
ground task than will individuals who do
not perceive S in the Rorschach.

The perception of Primary S in the Rorschach is

qualitatively different from the perception of

Secondary S.

A. Individuals who perceive Primary S in the
Rorschach will produce a significantly
greater number of reversals in a figure-
ground task than will individuals who
produce only Secondary S.

The use of white epace in the Rorschach test

reflects an intellectual opposition.

A. Individuals who perceive Primary S in the
Rorschach will express a significantly

greater amount of opposition in a situation

- 23 -

involving a minimum of threat than will in-
dividuals who do not perceive S in the Ror-
schach.

The kind of opposition expressed in a situ-
ation involving a minimum of threat is related

to the type of Experience Balance in the

Rorschach.

 

Methodology

Subjects

There were three groups of subjects: Twenty
individuals who produced Primary S in the Rorschach,
twenty who produced Secondary S but no Primary 8 and
twenty who produced no B. All of the subjects were
male veteran, open ward patients at the Veterans Ad-
ministration.Hospital, Battle Creek, Michigan. At
this hospital, the Rorschach is commonly administered
to those patients referred to the Psychology Department
as part of the test battery. The testing is usually
done by a clinical psychOIOgy trainee under the super-
vision Of a staff psychologist. The subjects for this
study were chosen on the basis of the presence or ab«
sence of S in their Rorschach protocols. The two S
groups were chosen on the basis of having produced S
responses on these previously administered Rorschachs.
The Primary S and No S groups were matched individually
for intelligence and age. Each individual who perceived
Primary S in the Rorschach was matched with an individual
who perceived no S and did not differ by more than 10
points on the Wechsler-Bellevue Scale and more than 10
years in age. The t tests (for related measures) in-

dicated that there was no significant inter-group

 

- 25 -

variability between the Primary S and No S groups with
respect to age and intelligence. The Secondary S group
was randomly selected on the basis of having shown
Secondary S but no Primary S on the Rorschach. The t
tests indicated that the Secondary S group did not
differ significantly from either the Primary S or No

S groups with respect to age and intelligence. A com-
parison of the groups on the basis of these factors is
presented in Table 1. The Primary S and No S groups
were also matched individually on the basis of the final
diagnosis made by a board of psychiatrists. The distri~
bution of diagnoses among the three groups is presented

in Table 2.

Materials
1. Gerbrands modification of the Dodge tachis-
toscope with a grey pro-exposure field.

2. Stop-watch.

3. Standard individual Rorschach test.

4. l6 reversible figure-ground cards.

5. Rosenzweig PicturewFrustration test.

The figure~ground cards are presented in Appendix
I. Card 1 was designed to facilitate a set to attend to

both black and white aspects of the card. If attention

 

 

m.m w.mm m.:H :.moa om m hampaooom
. s.e s.mm m.ma m.moa om m oz
Mm m.w m.nm m.NH m.m0H om m macadam
.
am new: mm :moz z danced
owe. .d.H

 

owm one Anaboflaomtnoamnomzv

mocomaaaoch no mdsoaw mo sonaaoaaoo

H mqmda

- 27 -

TABLE 2

 

Diagnostic Characteristics of the Groups

 

 

 

Group
Diagnosis Primary No Secondary
S S S
SchiZOphrenia
Undifferentiated type 9 9 9
Paranoid type 3 3 2
Simple type 2 2 l
Schizo-Affective type 1
ManicéDepressive reaction 1 1
Chronic Brain Syndrome 2 2 1
Anxiety reaction 3 3 4
Conversion reaction 2
Total subjects 20 20 20

 

-28...

is focused on the center of this card the perspective
will often reverse involuntarily. Three “Internal
Figures“, cards 6, 11 and 16, were designed to approx-
imate the types of percepts which represent Primary S
on the Rorschach. The remainder of the cards consti-
tute the 12 reversible figure-ground cards used to test
hypotheses I and II. Of these 12 cards, all but two are
composed of a centrally located black figure and two
approximately identical figures in white, one on each
side. Cards 13 and 15 differ in that the white figures
are not identical. Card 13 represents an E on the left
and a 3 on the right side. Card 15 can only be reversed
as a 7 on the right side. Card 2 is the common vase-
face figure. Card 5 is a figure used in a study by
Dalla Volta (12) and cards 6, ll, 12 are modifications
of figures used by Dalla Volta.

The cards were constructed in the following
manner: The central figures were drawn on paper,
folded in half, and cut out. This was done to assure
as much symmetry as possible. The designs were then
traced on black construction paper, out out again, and
mounted on white cards. The cards were then photOgraphed
to eliminate any depth effect. Finally, the photographs

 

- 29 _

were mounted on mounting board of a size and thickness
suitable for use in the tachistosc0pe. The cards were
eleven and one-half inches long and nine inches wide.
However, when the cards were placed in the tachistoscope
only the central portion, seven and one-half inches
square, was visible.

The tachistoscope was used in an initial study
to determine the range of time involved in the per»
ception of these particular reversible cards. Once the
time limit of exposure of one minute was decided upon,
the timing mechanism was no longer necessary to the
experiment. However, the tachistoscope was still util-
ized because it prevented the subject from turning the
cards and also maximized the differences between the
figure-ground task and the Rorschach.

The Rosenzweig Picture-Frustration Study (43)
was utilized in this investigation to test the validity
of the hypotheses offered by KlOpfer et. a1. concerning
the white space reaponses as intellectual opposition.
The P-F Study is composed of a group of 24 cartoons which
are purported to represent some of the most common
frustrations of daily living. Of the two captions above

each cartoon, one contains the words said by one of the

- 30 -

persons in the cartoon. The other caption is blank

and provides a Space for the subject to fill in what

he believes the other person might say in that particular
situation. The subject is encouraged to express the
first idea which comes to his mind. Emphasis is placed
on speed of response and the avoidance of considered
thought before making a reaponse.

It is felt that the P-F Study is particularly
suited as a stimulus for the expression of intellectual
Opposition. In the first place, the test does not rep-
resent a severe threat to the individual and consequently
is not likely to evoke strong reactions of emotional
aggression. In fact, it has been described as a nonnego
invoking intellectual task (1). Secondly, the P-F Study
is scored in terms which represent, quite directly, the
varied types of behavior assumed to be represented by
the white space response.

As noted above, the white space response is
assumed to represent Opposition directed outward, oppo-
sition directed toward the self or ambivalence and doubt.
Rosenzweig provides a description of the scoring cate-

gories of the P-F Study as follows:

-31...

“Extrapunitiveness: Aggression is em-
ployed overtly and directed toward the
personal or impersonal environment in

the form of emphasizing the extent of

the frustrating situation,blaming an
outside agency for the frustration, or
placing some other person under obli-
gation to solve the problem in hand.
Intropunitiveness: Aggression is emu
ployed overtly, but directed by the
subject against himself in the form of

a martyr-like acceptance of the frustra-
tion as beneficial, acknowledgement of
guilt of shame, or an assumption of re-
sponsibility for correcting the frustra-
ting situation.

Impunitiveness: Aggression is evaded

or avoided in any overt form, and the frust—
rating situation is described as insig-
nificant, as no one's fault, or as likely
to be ameliorated by just waiting or con-
forming“ (#3; p. 8)

Further support for the use of this instrument in
the present context is given by a study by Holzberg and
Posner (22). In this study individuals who scored high
on extrapunitiveness also scored high on a measure of
assertiveness derived from a modification of the TAT.
The subjects were required to choose between two de-
scriptions of the content of a number of TAT cards.
These descriptions emphasized assertiveness, argumenta~
tiveness, independence, etc. in one choice and the
Opposite type of behavior in the second choice. Sub-
jects who scored high on intropunitiveness on the P-F

Study tended to score low on assertiveness on the TAT

- 32 -

while the extremes on the TAT failed to discriminate
those who scored high on impunitiveness on the PoF
Study. The scores on the P-F Study failed to cor-
relate with measures of overt aggression, however.
The results of the study suggest that the Rosenzweig
P-F Study is a measure of verbal, intellectual Oppo-
sition but not necessarily a measure of overt oppo-

sition.

Procedure

All subjects were tested individually by the
author. The task was presented as research being
carried out by the Psychology Department in an effort
to improve on some of the instruments the department
used as well as to devise some new instruments.

Of approximately 80 patients approached in this
manner, only 3 refused to cooperate. Two of these rec
fused because they were afraid the testing would upset
them and one because he just "wasn't interested.“

The entire testing procedure was carried out in
the same room and involved one sitting for each sub-
ject. It will be recalled that the groups had been

tentatively selected on the basis of their production

-33..

or lack of production of S on the original administration
Of the Rorschach. The Rorschach was readministered as

a part of the test battery, as a check on the stability
of their performance. In order to be included in the S
groups, the subject must have produced S in both admin-
istrations of the Rorschach. Similarly, to be included
in the No 8 group, the subject must not have produced S
in either administration Of the Rorschach. Thus, those
whose performance was inconsistent were discarded. The
second administration of the Rorschach indicated that
the tendency to produce or not to produce S was a com-
paratively stable characteristic. In only a few in—
stances (about 4 or 5) were subjects discarded because
their performance was inconsistent. It should be noted
that there is some evidence to suggest that examiner
variance may influence the production of S on the Ror-
schach. Berger (8), e.g., found a positive relationship
between the production of S by a subject and the pro-
duction Of S on the Rorschach of the examiner. For this
reason, the readministrations were all done by one exam-
iner, the author. This was done in the standard manner

following Beck (5).

- 3h -

Following the administration of the Rorschach,
the Rosenzweig P—F Study was administered. The subject
was given a copy of the standard P-F Study Booklet
(Appendix B) and the following instructions; a slight
modification of the standard instructions:

"In each of the pictures in this

leaflet two peeple are shown talk-

ing to each other. The words said

by one person are always given.

Imagine what the other person in

the picture would answer and tell

me the very first reply that comes

into your mind. Now read the words

.in the first picture out loud to me

and tell me the first reply to come

to your mind."
As the subject gave his replies the examiner wrote them
down in a separate booklet. Throughout the examination
the emphasis was on speed of association. Whenever
appropriate, the examiner reminded the subject not to
think about his answers but to give the first reply to
come to his mind.

The last test to be administered involved the
figure-ground cards. The nature and manner of operation
of the tachistOSOOpe was first eXplained in simple terms
to the subject. The tachistoscope was placed on a table.

The subject was seated on one side and the examiner was

- 35 -

seated out of view on the other side. The following
instructions were given:

"You will be given a series of cards.
I will show them to you one at a time
for one minute each. You look at the
card and tell me everything you see,
as you see it. Try to report as many
different things as you can and keep
looking at the card until I say stop.
Be sure to look at all parts of the
card carefully.”

After all of the cards had been presented once, they were
presented again with the following instructions:

”You did quite well on these but I

think you can do even better if you

look at all parts of the card, in-

cluding the white part. Will you

look at this one again and tell me

if you can see anything else that

might be represented there and pay

particular attention to the white
part."

During the second administration of the cards, attention
was called to the white part for the first three cards.
The instructions for the figure-ground task were
develOped on the basis of a pilot study. In this study
it was found that the instructions were not particularly
effective in eliciting reversals unless attention was
called to the white aspects of the card. As a result,
the instructions for the first administration were de-
signed to hold the subjects' attention to the task and

-36-

encourage him to look for different percepts. The second
administration provides the additional emphasis on the
white parts of the card. In the preliminary study it

was also found that subjects who were unable to per-
ceive the reversals in one minute were not likely to see
them no matter how much time they were allowed.

It was also necessary to develOp an order of pre-
sentation of the cards. The twelve figure-ground cards
were submitted to a group of five judges. The judges
were asked to rank the cards in the order of difficulty.
The final order of presentation was based on the mean of
the judgments for each card.

The figuremground cards were presented to a group
of 12 pilot subjects who had produced S on the Rorschach

(range 2 - 21 S). The cards were presented in an order

from most to least difficult in this preliminary study.
This order was tried in an attempt to develOp one indirect
measure of the strength of the tendency to produce figure-
ground reversals. It was thought that the earlier a
subject perceived reversals in a series of descending order
of difficulty, the stronger would be his tendency to

reverse figure and ground. However, only two of the

-37...

subjects were able to perceive any of the reversals and
they perceived only a small number. Since this order
was too difficult, the reverse order, from least to most
difficult, was tried in an attempt to elicit reversals
from enough subjects to permit statistical analysis.
This order proved to be effective and was adopted as

the final order of presentation. The Internal Figures
(cards 6, 11, 16) were arbitrarily inserted in those

positions.

Results

The statistical techniques utilized in this in-
vestigation were primarily what are termed Nor-Parametric
Methods. These techniques were considered particularly
appropriate to this investigation because they do not
demand any assumptions concerning the form of the dis-
tributions. The techniques used in this study, chi
square and the sign test, are two of the best known non-
parametric methods. The sign test is particularly
applicable in the treatment of matched pairs (34) which
was one of the characteristics of this study. Chi
square, on the other hand, was appropriate in the analysis
of unmatched groups.

Hypothesis I-A predicts that Primary S subjects
will produce more figure-ground reversals than will No
S subjects. Table 3 compares the Primary S group and
the No S group with reapect to the perception of re-
versals on the basis of matched pairs. In the case of
13 pairs, the individual in the Primary S group per-
ceived the most reversals. As can be seen in the table,
only 4 members of the No S group perceived more reversals
in the figure-ground task than did their match in the
Primary S group. An analysis of this data by means of

the sign test, in which the ties were disregarded,

 

- 39 _

TABLE 3

Number of Subjects
in the Primary and No 8 Groups
whose Reversals Exceed their Match in
the Comparison Group

 

 

Primary No Matched
S S pairs
greater greater equal

 

13 1+ 3

 

- ho -

demonstrated that this difference is significant at the
2.5 percent level of confidence. The results, then,
support the hypothesis that there exists a significant
and positive relation between the perception of Primary
S and a tendency to reverse figure and ground.

The number of S produced on the Rorschach did
not prove to be significant with reapect to the tendency
to reverse figure and ground. An individual who pro-
duced one Primary S on the Rorschach was just as likely
to perceive reversals as was the individual who pro-
duced two or three or more Primary S. (Table 4a)

Hypothesis II-A predicts that Primary S subjects
will produce more figure—ground reversals than will
Secondary S subjects. Table 4 compares the Primary S
group and Secondary S group on the basis of the percep-
tion of figure-ground reversals. An analysis of this
data was made by means of the chi square test. The Ob-
tained chi square of 2.500 fell short of the chi square
of 2.706 which is required for significance at the 5
percent level of confidence when predicting in one
direction. As this analysis indicates, the difference

between the Primary and Secondary S groups in the

.in.

TABLE 4

Number of Subjects
in Primary and Secondary S Groups
Perceiving Figure-Ground Reversals

 

 

Subjects Subjects
seeing seeing
reversals no reversals

 

 

Primary S 13 7
Secondary S 7 13
TABLE 4a

Comparison of Number of Primary S
and the Perception of FigurenGround Reversals

 

 

Reversals

Number of Primary S Above Mdn Below Mdn

 

O\
O\

2 or more

1 3 5

 

-42-

 

perception of figure-ground reversals does not meet the usual
statistical criteria for significance. However, there is a
definite trend in favor of a closer relation between the ten-
dency to reverse figure and ground and Primary S.

Table 5 shows the number of individuals in the Secondary
S and No S groups who perceived reversals on the figure-ground
task. An analysis by means of chi square reveals no significant
differences between these two groups. The chi square in this
analysis was .1202.

A comparison was made (Table 6) between the Primary and
No S groups on the perception of reversals on the Internal Fig-
ure Cards (cards 6,11,16,Appendix A). These figures parallel
the type of white Space figure usually defined as Primary S in
the Rorschach. An analysis by means of the sign test demonstrat-
ed that the Primary S and No S groups did not differ signifi—
cantly in the number of Internal Figures perceived.

It has been demonstrated that there is a tendency for S
to be associated with the total number of responses produced in
the Rorschach (3,14). This trend was also noted in the present
investigation. The mean number of responses for the Primary S
group was 30.05, for the Secondary group 28.30, and for the NO
S group 26.3 . However, these differences were not statistically
significant.

No clear-cut results were obtained from the second admin-

istration of the figure-ground task nor from the measure of

-43..

TABLE 5

Number of Subjects
in Secondary and No 3 Groups
Perceiving Figure~Ground.Reversals

 

Subjects Subjects
seeing seeing
reversals no reversals
Secondary S group 7 13

No S group 6 14

 

-44...

TABLE 6

Number of Subjects
in each Group whose Perception of Internal Figures
Exceed that of their Match in the Comparison Group

 

 

Primary No Matched
S S pairs
greater greater equal

 

11 5 H

 

-45..

latency time of the reversal of figure and ground. These re-
sults were contaminated by a number of different factors to
be discussed below.

The test of hypothesis III-A involved a comparison of
peak scores on the Rosenzweig P—F Study between the Primary S
and No S subjects. A high score in one category would indicate
that a subject reaponded in a relatively consistent manner
throughout the test. The peak score is simply the highest of
the three scores (extrapunitiveness, intropunitiveness and im-
punitiveness) obtained by a subject. The hypothesis demanded
that the Primary S subjects produce higher peak scores on the P~F
Study. An analysis by means of the sign test (13) failed to dem-
onstrate that the peak scores produced by the Primary S group
were consistently higher than those produced by the No S group.
The same results obtained when the number of Primary S produced
by a subject was considered. Subjects who produced two or more
Primary S in the Rorschach did not obtain consistently higher
peak scores on the P-F Study than did subjects who produced no
S in the Rorschach. Although the differences were not statis-
tically significant, high scores occurred more frequently in
the No S group. (Table 7a)

Table 7 compares the frequency with which individuals
in each group scored higher on extrapunitiveness, intro-
punitiveness and impunitiveness than did their matched pair.

An analysis made by means of the sign test on the basis of pairs

_ 46 -

TABEE 7

Comparison of Matched Pairs
in Terms of Highest Scores
on the Major Scoring Categories of the P-F Study

 

 

___—‘ J
”

 

 

 

 

 

Primary No Matched
S S pairs
higher higher equal
Extrapunitiveness 10 10 0
Intropunitiveness 9 10 l
Impunitiveness 12 5 3
TABLE 7a

Comparison of Individuals
with Two or More Primary S and their Matched Pairs
in Terms of High Scores on the P-F Study

 

Primary No
S S
higher higher

 

- h7 -

failed to reveal any significant differences between the
groups with respect to peak scores on the separate scor-
ing categories. (Individual scores - Appendix 0)

As a test of hypothesis III-B an analysis was
made of the relationship between the type of “Experience
Balance” on the Rorschach and the kind of Opposition as
eXpressed in the Rosenzweig P-F Study.

The type of “EXperience Balance" was defined by
the following criteria:

1. Extratensive: Sum of color (C)
two or more greater than move-
ment (M).

2. Introversive: Movement (M) two
or more eater than sum of
color (C .

3. Ambiegual: Both M and C greater
than two and the difference be-

tween them not more than one.

4. Constricted: When both M and C
are two or less.

These records in which both M and C were two or less
(Constricted) were not considered in the analysis.
Support of the hypothesis derived from the
theoretical discussion above would require that the
peak score on the Rosenzweig P—F Study correspond with

the "EXperience Balance“ in the following manner:

-148...

1. Individuals with an extra-
tensive Experience Balance
will attain the highest score
on the Rosenzweig P-F Study
in the extrapunitive category.

2. Individuals with an intro-
versive EXperience Balance will
attain the highest score on the
Rosenzweig P-F Study in the
intrOpunitive category.

3. Individuals with an ambiequal
EXperience Balance will attain
the highest score on the
Rosenzweig P-F Study in the
impunitive category.

The data was analyzed for the Primary S group.
Of this group, 6 subjects obtained constricted EXperience
Balances and were not included in the analysis. Table
8 demonstrates that the peak scores in the P-F Study
failed to agree with the predicted Experience Balance
on more than a chance basis.

The results of the investigation, then, fail to
support the hypothesis that the perception of S in the
Rorschach is related to a tendency to eXpress an in-
tellectual type of Opposition, at least insofar as in-
tellectual opposition is measured by the P-F Study.
Furthermore, they fail to support the hypothesis that
the kind of opposition is related to the Experience

Balance.

- 49 _

TABLE 8

Comparison of Obtained and Expected Degree
of Agreement Between Peak Scores in the P-F Study
and Experience Balance in the Rorschach

 

Agree Disagree

h

 

Obtained 4 10
EXpected 4.6 9.4

lb

 

Discussion of Results

Authors who have concerned themselves with the
interpretation of the Rorschach white space response
appear to have accepted three assumptions as fact.

The first assumption is that the white space response
reflects some kind of oppositional tendency. The second
assumption is that the mode of the expression of Oppo-
sition depends on the particular type of Experience
Balance with which the white Space is associated, and
the third is that the perception of S represents, in
perceptual terms, a reversal of figure and ground.

The present investigation was undertaken in an
effort to test the validity of these assumptions.
Specifically, it was designed to evaluate a recent
interpretation made by Klopfer, et. a1. (26). This
interpretation (A) suggests that the perception of
white space in the Rorschach reflects an intellectual
type of opposition (in contrast to the traditional form~
ulation of S as an emotional expression of opposition),
(B) relates the mode of expression of opposition to the
Experience Balance, and (C) incorporates the assumption
that Primary S constitutes a reversal of figure and

ground.

 

- 51 _

Based on these considerations, the following
general hypotheses were formulated:

I. The perception of white Space
on the Rorschach test is re-
lated to a tendency to reverse
figure and ground.

II. The perception of Primary S in
the Rorschach is qualitatively
different from the perception
of Secondary S.

III. The use of white Space in the
Rorschach test reflects an in-
tellectual opposition - its
mode of expression depending
upon the Experience Balance.

The results of this investigation failed to
support the hypothesis that the use of white space
reflects an intellectual Opposition, at least insofar
as intellectual Opposition is measured by the Rosen-
zweig P-F Study. Although there were no significant
differences between groups, the No S group tended, con-
trary to the hypothesis, to have higher peak scores in
the P-F Study than did the S group. Scores for the
members of the S group, correspondingly, tended to be
more diversified among the three scoring categories of
the P-F Study and their peaks less extreme.

The secondary aspect Of this hypothesis held that

the mode of expression of Opposition reflected by the

- 52 -

white Space response is related to the type of Experience
Balance in the Rorschach. Three categories of response
in the P-F Study, which were utilized as measures of
three quite different aSpects of intellectual Opposition
agreed only on a chance basis with the categories Which
had been predicted on the basis of the type of Experience
Balance. The results Of this investigation, then, agree
with the others concerned primarily with the white space
response (3, 14) in failing to offer any support for the
practice of basing the interpretation of the white Space
reSponse on a particular type Of Experience Balance.

The fact that experimental investigations have
consistently failed to demonstrate a relationship be-
tween a particular type of Experience Balance and re-
sponse dimensions even minimally associated with white
space suggests the wisdom of a reevaluation Of the in-
terpretation of S. Assuming that a psychOlOgical cor-
relate of the white space response exists, perhaps it is
more logical to consider white space reSponse as a re-
flection of a unitary or at least consistent personality
dimension. The possible nature of such a dimension is

tentatively suggested below.

-53..

The results of the investigation support the
first general hypothesis. That is, the perception of
white Space on the Rorschach test is related to a ten-
dency to reverse figure and ground. However, this re-
lationship holds only in the case Of Primary S. The
Secondary S group demonstrated no more facility in per-
ceiving figure-ground reversals than did the NO S group.
An analysis in terms Of the perception of figure-ground
reversals revealed no statistically significant differ-
ences between the Primary and Secondary S groups. How-
ever, there was a definite trend in the direction Of more
reversals perceived by the Primary S group. This trend
may be the result of chance differences between the
groups or it may indicate that the two types of S are
qualitatively different, at least in terms Of the per-
ceptual processes involved. The results of the present
study, then, fail to support the second general hypothesis.

During the preliminary studies with the figure-
ground cards, a wide range of individual difference in
the ability to perceive reversals was noted. This ability
was not noticably facilitated by such verbal instructions

as "look at all parts of the card carefully" and "report

-54..

as many different things as you can.“ Some individuals
readily perceived the reversals on the basis Of a mini-
mum Of instructions. A few could not see them until the
reversals were practically pointed out to them. However,
when the subject's attention was called to the white part
of the card, during the second administration of the cards,
all but two Of the sixty subjects were able to perceive
some and usually most of the reversals quite readily.
There were no group differences with respect to the ten~
dency to reverse figure and ground in the second admini—
stration Of the test.

The latency time involved in the perception Of
reversals did not prove to be a satisfactory measure Of
the tendency to reverse figure and ground. In the first
administration many subjects failed to perceive any res
versals. In the second administration the time of re—
sponse was contaminated by the set adopted by the subject.
If a subject perceived reversals on the first trial, he
might perceive the same reversals very readily on the
second trail or he might attempt to identify different
reversals from those perceived on the first trial and

consequently increase the latency time.

-55...

After the second administration, many of the sub-
jects made comments to the effect that they thought they
were only supposed to look at the black and thus did not
see the reversals on the first trial. While such state-
ments suggest that the subjects adOpted a set to see
black, in reality, in many cases, it appears that this
set was to see the central figure regardless Of color.
Subjects who perceived the reversals, in most instances,
also perceived the Internal Figures. However, subjects
who were unable to perceive the reversals were just as
likely to perceive the Internal Figures. If a subject
had adopted a set to see only black, he would not be
expected to perceive the Internal Figures which are
white.

These facts are more easily explained if the color
differences are disregarded. It is suggested that sub-
jects who were unable to perceive the reversals had
adopted a set to perceive the centrally located, sur-
rounded figure. Two factors contributed tO the ease
with which the Internal Figures were perceived. In the
first place, these cards followed, temporally, groups of
cards in which the figure was consistently located in the

~56-

center Of the card. Secondly, the Internal Figures
were spatially located in a position which had con-
sistently been perceived as a figure. A third possible
factor lies in the construction of the Internal Figure
cards themselves. The surrounding figures in these
cards were considerably more simple and realistic than
the reversal cards. Consequently, attention was held
to these figures for only a short time. Since the sub-
jects were required to view the card for a full minute,
their attention subsequently fixated on the center of
the cards - the Internal Figure.

It is suggested, then, that subjects who failed
to perceive the reversals did so because they rigidly
adhered to one particular set to see the black figure
or central figure. These findings suggest a dimension
of flexibility related to the perception Of figure-
ground reversals. Four patterns were discernible along
this dimension. One group of subjects only reported
the black figures. A second group was able to see the
black and the white Internal Figures. A third group
was able to perceive reversals but only after the first

Internal Figure card was presented. A fourth group

 

-57...

perceived reversals easily and was able to shift readily
from Internal Figure to reversal, etc.

Piotrowski asserts that the basic assumption
underlying Rorschach interpretation is that there is
a close correspondence between an individual‘s percepts
and the manner in which he deals with his environment.

On the basis of this assumption, the white space re-
sponse has traditionally been interpreted as indicative
of Opposition, negativism, contrariness, etc.

The assumption is that the individual is adopting
an unusual approach in perceiving the white space (the
"Opposite") rather than the common colored aspects of
the card. However, on the basis of the demonstrated
relationship between the perception of S and the per-
ception of figure~ground reversals and also the suggested
relationship between flexibility and figure—ground re—
versals, an alternative hypothesis seems equally possible.
That is, the white space response reflects flexibility in
perception. This flexibility extends to other aspects
of the personality. Instead of being Oppositional, an
individual who perceives white Space in the Rorschach

is capable of seeing a number Of sepects to a situation.

-58-

His approach to problems is varied. He does not rigidly
adhere to one line of thinking and is capable of adapting
to a new situation. The basic concept Of flexibility may
be modified and elaborated in this manner on the basis Of
the total record without being dependent upon any one
particular aSpect of the record, such as the Experience
Balance. In this manner, specific interpretations are
likely to be more consistent and, therefore, more test-

able.

Implications for Further Research

An alternative hypothesis to the traditional in-
terpretation of the Rorschach white space response as
indicative of opposition was made. It was suggested
that flexibility may be the psychological correlate of
S. Such an interpretation is deserving of investigation.
One approach to this problem would be to compare S and
NO S groups on various measures Of flexibility. If
flexibility can be contrasted with rigidity, one such
measure could be composed Of some of the more satisfac-
tory measures Of rigidity which have already been develop-
ed. Adequate measures Of flexibility may provide the
means for determining the relationship between Primary S
and Secondary S. If S is found to be related to flexi—
bility it may be that the types Of S can be distinguished
on the basis of degree Of flexibility. Some support for
the flexibility hypothesis exists in the fact that
Scharmann (45) noted a greater degree of flexibility, at
least in the intellectual sphere, among those members of
a group of brain injured subjects who produced S on the
Rorschach.

With further support for this hypothesis it may

be found that S has important implications for diagnosis

 

-60..

and prognosis. In the case of brain injuries, for example,
it may be that the white space response is related to the
severity of the injury. That is, it may be that brain in-
jured individuals who demonstrate a capacity of flexi-
bility are less incapacitated than those who have little
such capacity. White space may also prove to be a
positive factor in considering a patient for psycho-
therapy.

The figure-ground cards utilized in this study
provide an instrument for further research in the area
Of figure-ground phenomena. Most of the research in
this area is subject to criticism on the basis of
methodology. With the addition of these figureuground

cards a more adequate analysis of this area is possible.

Summary and Conclusions

This study was designed to test the validity of
two major hypotheses concerning the Rorschach white
space response.

One hypothesis was based on a common assumption
that the white space represents a reversal of figure and
ground and therefore has face validity on the basis of
its being the “Opposite” of the usual percept.

The second major hypothesis stemmed from a recent
interpretation of the white Space response made by Klopfer,
et. a1. (26). This interpretation placed the Opposition
associated with S by most authors in the intellectual
sphere as Opposed to purely emotional aggression.

The following hypotheses were submitted to ex-
perimental test:

I. The perception of white Space on the Rorschach test
is related to a tendency to reverse figure and
ground.

A. Individuals Who perceive Primary S in the
Rorschach will produce a significantly greater
number of reversals in a figure—ground task
than will individuals who do not perceive S

in the Rorschach.

 

II.

III.

~62-

The perception Of Primary S in the Rorschach is

qualitatively different from the perception of

Secondary'S.

A.

Individuals who perceive Primary S in the
Rorschach will produce a significantly
greater number Of reversals in a figure-
ground task than will individuals who pro-

duce only Secondary S.

The use of white space in the Rorschach test re-

flects an intellectual Opposition.

A.

Individuals who perceive Primary S in the Horn
schach will express a significantly greater
amount of opposition in a situation involving
a minimum of threat than will individuals who
do not perceive S on the Rorschach.

The kind of Opposition eXpressed in a situ-
ation involving a minimum Of threat is re-
lated to the type of Experience Balance in

the Rorschach.

Sixty open ward patients Of a neuropsychiatric

hospital were used as subjects for this investigation.

One group was composed of 20 individuals who produced

Primary 8 in the Rorschach. The second group of 20

 

-63..

produced no S in the Rorschach and were matched in—
dividually with the Primary S group on the basis of
age, intelligence and diagnosis. The third group Of
20 was composed of individuals who produced Secondary
but no Primary S in the Rorschach.

The Rosenzweig Picture-Frustration Study, on the
basis of certain characteristics of the test as well as
the results of research with it, was used as a measure
Of intellectual Opposition. A series of cards on the
order of Rubin's vase~face reversal of figure and ground
were used to measure the tendency to reverse figure and
ground. The subjects were tested individually with the
Rorschach, P-F Study and figure-ground cards, in that
order.

The results of the investigation failed to support
the hypothesis that S reflects an intellectual type of
Opposition as measured by the P-F Study. However, the
hypothesis that S is related to a tendency to reverse
figure and ground was supported. The results failed to
demonstrate that Primary S and Secondary S are quali-
tatively different although there was found a trend in
the direction of a closer relation between the tendency

to reverse figure and ground and Primary S.

-64-

In discussing the results of the investigation
the basic interpretation Of the white space was questioned
and an alternative hypothesis suggested. That is, the
perception Of white Space is indicative Of flexibility.
The need for further research in this area was pointed
out and one possible means Of approach was outlined.
Some of the possible implications of such an investi—

gation were also mentioned.

10.

11.

Selected References

Albee, G. W. and Goldman, R. The Picture~Frustration

Study as a predictor of overt aggression.
Tech., 1950, 1h, 303-308.

g. prgj.

Balloch, J. C. The effect of degree of shading

contrast in ink blots on verbal reaponse.
Psychol., 1952, #3, 120-12h.

g. exp.

Bandura, A. The Rorschach white space response and
llOp ositional” behavior. g. consult. Psycho;.,

195 , 18, 17-21.

Bandura, A. ,5 study p; some 93 the psychological
‘_processes associated with the white space

response. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation.

State University of Iowa. 1952.

Beck, S. J. Rorschach's test. Vol. I. Basic
processes. New York: Grune and Stratton, 1944.

Beck, S. J. Rorschach's test. Vol. II. ‘A variety
9; personality picture . New York: Grune and

Stratton, 1959.

Bell, J. E. Projective techniques. New York:

Longmans, Green and CO., l9h8.

Berger, D. Examiner influence on the Rorschach.

g. Olin. Psychpl., 1951», x, 245-2u8.

Bochner, R. and Halpern, F. The clinical applipgtion

p; the Rgrschach test. (2nd ed., rev.)
Buhler, C., Buhler, K., and Lefever, W. D.

New York:

W

p; the basic Rorschach score wipp manual 2:
directions. Los Angeles, Calif.: Rorschach

Standardization Studies, NO. l,_ l9u5.

Dalla Volta, A. L'inversione dei rapporti di figura
e sfondo nella Efiova di Rorschach. NeOpsichiatria,

v01. my 19143"

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

-66..

Dalla Volta, A. Contributi allo studio della
percezione con particolare riferimento alla
psicologia differenziale. II. Forma e
significato nel processo di inversions del
rapporto di figura e sfondo. Archivio di
Psicologia Neurpjogia.p Pslongatria, I§E9,
10, 1-112.

Dixon, W. J. and Massey, F. J., Jr. Introduction

3p statistical analysi . New York, London,
Toronto: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1951.

Fonda, C. P. The nature and meaning of the Rorschach
white s cc response. 7;. abnorm. soc. Psychol.,
1951a 6: N00 3: 367‘3770

Ford, M. The apolication pi the Rorschach teat_pp
oun childrep. The University of Minnesota Press,
19 .

Goldhamer, H. The influence of area, position, and
brightness in the visual perception of a reversible
configgration. Amer. g. ngchp;., 1934, 46,
189-20 .

Graham, C. H. Area, color, and brightness difference
in a reversible configuration. .g. gen. Psychol.,

Harrower, M. R. Some factors determining figure-
ground articulation. Brit. g. Psychol., 1936,

Harrower, M. R. Changes in figure-ground perception
in patients with cortical lesions. Brit. Q.

EEIEEQlo: 1939. 30. 47-51.

Hertz, M. R. Frequency tables t pp used.;p scoring
the Rorschach nkb ot tesp. 3rd ed.) Western
Reserve Univ., 19 .

Hochberg, J. E. Figure-ground reversal as a function
of visual satiation. 1, exp. Psychol., 1950,

 

22.

25.

26.

27.

31.

32.

- 67 -

Holzberg, J. D. and Posner, R. The relationship of
extrapunitiveness on the Rosenzweig Picture-
Frustration Study to aggression in overt behavior
and fantasy. Amer. g; Orthgpsychiat., 1951, 21,

767-779.

Ingram, W. Prediction 9; aggression from the
Rorschach. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
Northwestern University, 1950.

Ingram, W. Prediction of aggression from the
Rorschach. g. consult. Psychol., 1954, 18,
23-28.

Klopfer, B. and Kelly, D. M. The Rorschach Tech-
nigue. Yonkers: World Book Company, 1946.

Klopfer, B., Ainsworth, M. D., Klopfer, W. G. and
Holt, R. R. DevelOpments ;p the Rorschach
technique. Yonkers: World Book Company, 1954.

Koffka, K. Perception: an introduction to the
Gestalt-Theorie. Psychol. Bull., 1922, 19,
553-570.

Koffka, K. Principlgs pg Gestglt Psychplogy.
New York, Harcourt, Brace, 1935.

Koehler, W. Dynamics ;3 psychology. New York:
Liveright, 19 O.

Lapi, L. Contributo allo studio del processo di
inversions del ra porto figura-sfondo. Riv.

Psicol., 1949, 5, 125-130.

Lazarus, R. L. The influence of color on the
protocol of the Rorschach test. (g. abnorm. soc.

Psychol., 1947, 44, 506-516.

Loeb, C. ,L'inversione del rapporto figura sfondo

nei malati mentali. Arch. Psicol. Neurol.
Psichiap., 1953, 14, 255- 7.

 

33.

34.

35.

36.

37.

38.

39.

40.

41.

42.

1+3.

-68-

Mons, W. Principles and practice p; the Rorschach
personality test. Philadelphia, Montreal, London,
J. B. Lippencott Company.

Moses, L. E. Non-Parametric statistics for psycho-
logical research. Psychol. Bull., 49, 1952.

Munroe, R. L. Prediction of the adjustment and
academic performance Of college students by a
modification Of the Rorschach method. Appl.

Psychol. Monogr., 1945, NO. 7.

Pattie, F. A. The effect of hypnotically induced
hostility on Rorschach responses. pg. clin.
Psychol., 1954, 10, 161-164.

Phillips, L. and Smith, J. G. Rorschach Interpretation:
Advanced Technique. New York: Grune and Stratton,

1953.

Piotrowski, A. A. A Rorschach compendium. Psychiat.
uart., 1947, 21, 79-101.

 

Rabin, A. I. and Sanderson, M. H. An experimental
inquiry into some Rorschach procedures. I§.,plip.
Psychol., 1947, 3, 216-225.

Rapaport, D., Gill, M., and Schafer, R. Diagnostic
Psychological testing. Vol. II. The Year Book
Publishers, Inc., 1946.

Rorschach, H. Psychodiagnpstics, p diagnostic test
based pp perception. (Trans. by Lemkau, P. and
Kronenburg, B.). Bern: Huber, 1942.

Rosen, E. MMPI and Rorschach correlates Of the
Rorschach white Space reaponse. g. clin. Psychol.,
1952, 8, 283-288-

Rosenzweig, S. The Picture-Association Method and
its application in a study of reactions to
frustration. g. Pers., 1945, XIV, 3-23.

 

44.

45.

46.

47.

48.

49.

50.

51.

52.

- 59 _

Schachtel, E. G. Notes on Rorschach tests of 500
juvenile delinquents and a control group of 500
non-delinquent adolescents. ,g..proj. Tegh., 1951,
15, 144-172.

Scharmann, T. Die Zwischenraumdeutungen in Rorschach-
test. Versuch einer gestaltpsychologischen Erklae-
rung. Beih. Schweiz. Z. Psychol. Anwend., 1950,
£9, )64-72. (In Psych. Abstr., 1952, 26, No. 10,

290 .

Siipola, E., Kuhns, F., and Taylor, V. Measurement of
the individuals reactions to color in ink blots.
i. PerS. , 1950, 19, 153-1710

Thetford, W. N., Molish, H. B., and Beck, S. DevelOp=
mental aSpects of personality structure in normal
children. pg. proj. Tech., 1951, 15, 58-78.

Vernon, P. E. The Rorschach ink blot test. Brit. i.
med. Psychol., 1933, 13, 89-118.

Werner, H. and Strauss, A. A. Pathology of the
figure-background relation in the child. pi.
abnorm. soc. Psychol., 1941, 36, 236-248.

Wever, E. G. Figure and ground in the visual
perception of form. Amer. J. Psychol., 1927,

Wever, E. G. Attention and clearness in the
perception Of figure and ground. Amer. g.

Psychol., 1928, 40, 51-74.

Williams, M. I. Experimental correlates ~ the
experimental validation of the Rorschach test.
Amer. g. OrthOpsychiat., 1952, 22, 749-754.

APPEND ICES

Appendix A

Photographs Of Figure—Ground Cards

I). r llllll II n) I I 'll ‘1' I ill | l I

 

 

 

Card 1 Card 2

 

 

 

 

Card 3 Card 4

 

 

 

Card 5

 

 

Card 7

Card 6

 

 

Card 8

Card 9 Card 10

Card 11 Card 12

Card 13 Card 14

Card 15 Card 16

 

/

W "

/

r/ V
C ard 11*

H I?

___

,~"""'1_—_
Card 16

 

 

r=—"—’f’3

Card 15

Appendix B

Rosenzweig Picture-Frustration Study Booklet

Name Age Birthday

 

Addres 5 Education

 

Ins titution Pre sent date

 

ROSENZWEIG P-F STUDY

(Revised Form for Adults)

Instructions

In each of the pictures in this leaflet two peOple
are shown talking to each other. The words said by one
person are always given. Imagine what the other person

tell me
in the picture would answer and iffyt/é/fijfihe’flfifflw
the very first reply that comes into your mind. WW

a’s’lfiiVflS/ytflytflyf. Now read the words in the first
picture out loud to me and tell me the first

reply to come to your mind.

COpyright, 1948, by Saul Rosenzweig

 

I’m very sorry
we splashed
your clothing
just now

though we tried
hard to avoid

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

How awful!
That was my
mother’ 5
favorite vase
you just

 

 

 

L broke.

 

 

You can’ t
see

athing.

 

 

 

 

It’s a shame
my car had to
break down and
make you miss

 

 

 

your train.

T

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is the third
time I’ve had to
bring back this
brand new watch
which I bought
only a week ago—-
it always staps as
soon as I get home.

 

5%: it?

 

 

The library
rules permit
you to take
only two books
at a tithe.

L‘Y’ -———-,—'_"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tampa]

I

 

 

 

 

. Illa]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Aren’t you
being a little
too fussy?

 

 

 

 

 

Your girl
friend invited
me to the
dance tonight--
she said you
weren’t going.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Perhaps you do
need your
umbrella but you
will have to wait
until this after-
noon when the
manager comes.

\
\\¢I oHZ‘

\\\
J,\\‘\H\

 

 

\
WA

A

 

 

‘l

 

 

 

 

You’ re a liar
and you know
it!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pardon me--
the Operator
gave me the '
wrong number.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If this isn’t your
hat, Fred Brown
must have walked
off with it by
mistake and left
his.

 

4___y

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

5.7
U

|7

 

 

 

 

 

 

12.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I can’ t see you
this morning
even though we
made the
arrangement
yesterday.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Too bad,
partner. We’ d
have won after
your swell
playing if I
hadn’ t made
that stupid
mistake.

 

 

 

 

 

W
She should
have been here
10 minutes
ago.
i‘ 7‘
h L 4 l /

 

You had no
right to try
and pass me.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is a fine
time to have
lost the keys!

 

 

 

 

 

Q.
3%

\

\t

,i

 

 

 

Where do you
think you’ re
going, passing

that schoolhouse

at 60 miles an
hour!

 

 

 

 

I’m sorry--
we just sold
the last one.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1W“

2W”
1 l

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I wonder why
she didn’t
invite us ?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  
 
  
 

The woman about
whom you are
saying those
mean things was
in an accident
yesterday and

is now in the

 
     

 

 

 

 

 

 

   
 

 

Did you hurt
yourself ?

 

 

 

 

 

 

‘35 E
) 2’7 } a
'7 (l /
I <7 ‘
\~ ’22.

Here’ 5 your
newspaper I
borrowed--
I’m sorry the
baby tore it.

 

She wants us to
wait awhile until
she can get here
to give us her
blessing again.

V

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

%

fl
A
‘ I

 

 

 

Appendix C

Percentage Scores of Primary S and No S Groups

in the Major Scoring Categories
of the Rosenzweig Picture—Frustration Study

 

 

Extra- Intro- Im-

punitive punitive punitive

Subjects Primary No Primary No Primary No
S S S S S S
1 38 5“ 29 29 33 17
2 27 5b 40 25 33 21
3 38 27 33 44 29 29
h 52 75 27 17 21 8
5 ”6 33 25 29 29 38
6 42 15 25 52 33 33
7 58 31 25 N6 17 23
8 #6 56 25 15 29 29
9 48 29 27 29 25 #2
10 27 46 35 31 38 23
11 4b 52 35 33 21 15
12 38 35 33 52 29 13
13 33 71 34 12 33 17
14 63 31 21 38 16 31
15 50 38 33 37 17 25
16 29 7h 42 13 29 13
17 48 63 33 29 19 8
18 33 73 29 13 38 lh
19 25 21 31 37 #4 42
20 5O 46 27 3 23 21

 

lNlEK-UBsAi-“fi’ LOAN
OCT 1 5 '55

w\

nga
NOV 13 1981) A":

.
v!

    

 

 

 

 

 

”1113111.:

02