ABSTRACT
As noted in chapters 6 and 9, the analysis of deviant verbalizations represents an exceptionally valuable and lasting contribution of Rapaport et al. (1945–1946) to Rorschach theory and practice. From a clinical perspective, these scores have typically been considered and used as cardinal indicators of disturbances in thinking. From a research perspective, these scores have been conceptualized and applied in any number of ways, including as measures of thought disturbance, boundary disturbance, and primitive modes of object relating. Furthermore, specific indices, such as fabulized combinations, confabulations, and contaminations, have been included in scales devised to assess defense (P. Lerner and H. Lerner, 1980) and developmental object relations (Coonerty, 1986). Significantly, regardless of how these indices are conceptualized, investigators have found them to be remarkably useful in assessing the variable (e.g., thinking, boundaries, defense) being studied. In addition, the yield from these indices is rich. It is important and reasonable, then, to ask two related questions: first, what accounts for the robustness of these scores? and second, what is it they are measuring?
