Métodos Projetivos e Avaliação Psicológica - BVS Psicologia ...

107shaking hands.” Obviously, the coded behavior involves relational thinking, so response processsupported retaining Synthesis. Another score category with good response process supportwould be the Level 2 Cognitive Special Scores (simply Cognitive Codes in R‐PAS) for thoughtdisordered communication. Such instances closely resemble visual or linguistic demonstrationsof disordered thinking. Also, research findings produced a general or global picture for manyvariables, so that we used response process to specify or delineate our interpretativestatements for individual variables. As an example, Synthesis (DQ+ or Sy) demonstrates arelationship with age and education in research. By extension such a finding would connectsynthesis with sophisticated or mature thinking, but it is the response process that helps tospecify relational thinking as a more refined expression of the broader research‐basedinterpretation.We have focused on the behavioral component of the Rorschach response process(Meyer & Viglione, 2008, Meyer et al., 2011, Viglione & Rivera, 2003) in the context of theRorschach being a performance test (Meyer & Kurtz, 2006), in which personality isdemonstrated in processing and behavior, so that the “personality‐in‐action” is revealed. Thus,the Rorschach, as conceived of within R‐PAS, becomes a behavioral test in which the examinerobserves, quantifies, and documents important behaviors, so as to describe and interpret themlater.In finalizing our variables we also considered our parsimony, simplicity, and redundancy,as suggested in R‐PAS favoring MOR over DEPI. As another example, Zf is eliminated because itis handled by other variables, most notably the Complexity variable. In addition, we consideredpsychometric and distributional properties so that we were more likely to drop low base ratevariables or ones which are coded less reliably. We considered our international clinician surveyfindings (Meyer, Hsiao, Viglione, Mihura, & Abraham, in press), and also a new learners surveyon ease of learning and understanding coding (Viglione, Ptucha, & Meyer, 2008). The amount ofevidence supporting variables and interpretations is emphasized in the R‐PAS Summary Scoresand Profiles, the main R‐PAS quantitative information. Accordingly, variables on the R‐PAS Page1 are emphasized in interpretation and Page 2 variables are less important.