Understanding storytelling tests through self theory

Understanding storytelling tests through self theory

Here is the first out of 3-4 posts that take a look at Prof. Marshall Silverstein's approach to the interpretation of storytelling tests (I mean tests like TAT, CAT, HTP.  These will be the tests I'll refer to, but Silverstein interprets the Rorschach with this approach too). 

Prof. Marshall Silverstein

The approach is described in this book:

  

Self psychology and diagnostic assessment: identifying selfobject functions through psychological testing.  Reprinted 2009 by Routledge

The book is quite interesting.  I've read it twice. It adds theoretical depth to our work with projective tests.  Silverstein draws on Self psychology and shows how we can identify injuries to the self, lack of self cohesiveness, indications of mirroring, idealization and twinship needs, compensatory structures and defense mechanisms (vertical and horizontal splits) in projective tests.

My concise presentation of this approach, part1 of which is here, does not go into details about self psychology, beyond what's needed to understand its application to projective tests.  The presentation is based almost entirely on Silverstein's book, but I also drew from Zehava Osterweil's book "Open solutions" (I believe it's published only in Hebrew) and from other sources.

I'm no expert on this subject and present it from the viewpoint of an amateur, enthusiastic reader.

Some points I find important when working with projective tests:

·  In order to draw a well based conclusion we must see that the phenomena we've identified repeat themselves over several stories and are not found only in one story.  Good assessment practices (of the cognitive abilities as well) require us not to draw conclusions that are based on a single finding or on a thin evidence base.

·  Each child "speaks" a different theoretical "language".  Not every child's protocol will "speak" the self theory language.  Some children's protocols lend themselves to cognitive interpretations and these will be more fruitful than dynamic or other interpretations.

·   Stories can be conceptualized  through different  theories – family theories, narrative theories and more  -  according to the psychologist's taste and knowledge.  It's worth remembering, that an interpretation is a mirror of the psychologist's personality as much as the child's.  It enlightens the things the psychologist pays attention to, the things the psychologist finds important - not only the "objective truth" of the child.

·  It's important to think about the links between the findings from projective tests and from the child's cognitive tests.  It's worthwhile to think how the personality of the child, revealed to us through his stories, influences the ways in which the child processes cognitive information, and how the child's cognitive strengths and weaknesses influence the way he interprets the stimuli in projective tests.