SIS Journal of Projective Psychology & Mental Health

JOURNAL OF PROJECTIVE PSYCHOLOGY & MENTAL HEALTH The Official Publication of the Somatic Inkblot Society Volume 3 Number 1 January, 1996 SIS ISSN 0971 - 6610 Vol. 3, No. 1, Pgs. 1-55 SIS JOURNAL OF PROJECTIVE PSYCHOLOGY & MENTAL HEALTH 1996

SIS JOURNAL OF PROJECTIVE PSYCHOLOGY AND MENTAL HEALTH is published twice a year (January & July) by the SOMATIC INKBLOT SOCIETY and is devoted to the advancement of research in the areas of projective psychology, personality assessment, psychotherapy and mental health. The journal is broadly concerned with the development of inkblot tests and personality assessment in clinical, counselling, cross cultural, organizational and health psychology settings. It aims to reach clinical psychologists, psychotherapists, psychiatrists, social workers, medical professionals and professional managers interested in the understanding and modification of human behaviour. The journal includes (a) research articles (b) book reviews (c) brief reports (d) news about conferences etc. and letters to the editor. MANUSCRIPTS PREPARATION : Manuscripts should be typewritten (double spaced throughout) submitted in duplicate to B.L. Dubey, Ph.D. Editor- in - Chief SIS Journal, P.O.Box 1107, Sector-15 Post Office, Chandigarh 160015 (India). E-mail : sisdubey@hotmail.com Manuscript can also be submitted to Wilfred A. Cassell. M.D., Editor, 4501E, 104th Avenue, Anchorage, AK-99516 (USA). The Editors reserve the right to refuse manuscript submitted and to make minor additions/deletions. Authors should prepare their manuscripts according to the Journal of Personality Assessment. SUBSCRIPTION : The journal is free to members of the Society, Annual membership fees are US $50 for foreign members and Rs. 250, for Indian members, Institutional subscriptions are US $100 for Foreign institutions and Rs. 500 for Indian institutions. Life membership is US $300 for foreign members and Rs. 1500 for Indian members. Non-members may subscribe for $30 or Rs. 150/- per issue. Cheques should be made payable to 'SOMATIC INKBLOT SOCIETY’ Chandigarh and should reach Dr. B.L. Dubey, Editor- in -Chief, (Address given above). Please add $5./Rs. 30 if you are sending subscription through cheque. CHANGE OF ADDRESS : Society / journal members should inform Mrs Padma Dwivedi, Secretary, SIS Center, Post Box 1107, Sector-15 Post Office, Chandigarh-160015 (India), Tel/Fax 91-172-710986, E-Mail: sisdubey@hotmail.com and Foreign Members should inform, Anand Dubey, Joint Editor, SIS Journal, Post Box 244045, Anchorage, AK-99524 (USA), E-Mail : adubey@hotmail.com of any change of mailing address. Copyright @ 1994. SOMATIC INKBLOT SOCIETY

STATEMENT SHOWING OWNERSHIP AND OTHER PARTICULARS ABOUT SIS JOURNAL OF PROJECTIVE PSYCHOLOGY AND MENTAL HEALTH PLACE OF PUBLICATION : T-2/15, Sector-25 Chandigarh - 160014 PERIODICITY OF PUBLICATION : Half Yearly EDITOR'S PRINTER'S Name : Dr. B.L. Dubey PUBLISHER'S NATIONALITY : Indian ADDRESS : T-2/15, Sector 25, Chandigarh - 160015 OWNER : SOMATIC INKBLOT SOCIETY I, Dr. B.L. Dubey, hereby declare that the particulars given above are true to the best of my knowledge and belief. Sd/ Dr. B.L. Dubey, Editor-in-Chief SIS Journal of Projective Psychology and Mental Health Printed and Published by Dr. B.L. Dubey on behalf of Somatic Inkblot Society from T-2/15, Sector 25, Chandigarh - 160014 & Printed at Juneja Trading Agencies Pvt. Ltd. Printing Press, SCO 131-132, Sector 17-C, Chandigarh. Tel. : 702675, 704715. Editor : Dr. B.L. Dubey

SIS Journal of Projective Psychology & Mental Health Volume 3, Number 1, Jan 1996 Contents Page Nos. 1. Editorial : Newer Trends in Inkblot Techniques, S.K. Verma 1-2 2. The Use of the Rorschach and Somatic Inkblot 3-18 Series in Relasing Somatic Grief Wilfred A. Cassell and B.L. Dubey 3. A Comprehensive Profile of Personality Characteristics of Male 19-25 Drug Addicts Anjana Mukhopadhuau, Shabhra Bannerjee & Gopa Mttra 4. A Comparative Study of Male and Female on 26-31 Somatic Inkblot Series-I S.P. Rathee and Agyajit Singh 5. Interdependence of SIS Variable with S.K. Verma, Dwarka Pershad, 32-37 Personality Traits in Psychiatric Cases Kusum Bhagat & Rajinder Kaur 6. Projective Techniques With Particular Reference To Inkblot Tess 38-44 N.L. Dosajh 7. Thieses Pattern in Rorschach of Adolescents with Schizophrenia 45-49 S. Chaudhry and G.S. Sundari 8. Efficancy of a New Inkblot Technique in Differentiating Manics, 50-55 Alcohol, Dependents and Normals Amool R. Singh, K. S. Sengar, Habib Ahmed, K. R. Banerjee & T.R. Shukla

SIS J. Proj. Pst. & Ment Health (1996) 3:1-2 Editorial Newer Trends in Inkblot Techniques Inkblot techniques have now been in use for nearly a century. Starting as indirect techniques overcoming limitations of transparency in items used in questionnaires and rating scales and therefore subject to motivational distortions these inkblot techniques have brought a new and fresh approach to study human behavior – both normal as well as abnormal. In this connection, it is also important to remember that it all started with the experimental use of inkblots as a test of imagination (by A. Binet). Psychologists and psychiatrists thereafter, used their creative imaginations to shift emphasis from content only to form and organizational qualities, good and poor qualities, good and poor match to inkblot location and from qualitative use of inkblots to both qualitative as well as quantitative indices with psychiatric patients mainly (Rorschach). Experimental uses, diagnostic and prognostic formulations and the therapeutic implications of inkblot responses resulted from their original, constructive and creative imaginations. Variations in inkblots, in their administration and scoring methods, as well as in their interpretative use, which followed, all added to the richness of this important product of human imagination. Recently – that is – in the last couple of decades, almost a silent, though significant revolution seems to be taking place with the advent of Somatic Inkblot Series (W.A.Cassell) in this area. Human ingenuity has added many more dimensions to it for the first time. Already there are a number of such series available – for general as well as for specific uses, with greater emphasis on their therapeutic applications. Parallel forms are available in cards, booklets and video form for more stimulating and effective uses of these inkblots. Even sound has added in between and pleasant colorful visuals with soothing music introduced to reduce any anxiety at the beginning, in between the exposures of inkblots, as well as at the end – so that little, if any unpleasant feelings or impressions are left and carried home, to add to their already existing overwhelming distress. The patient’s” inner cry” has to be seen and heard, understood and respected for what it stands for, and cared for, and merely used or exploited for diagnosing and interesting case or for a research publication. It may be a feeble cry for some but a lot depends upon the therapists’ sensitivity, intention and competence. Needless to say, this is an endless, ongoing process with newer, better, more specific techniques adding to, supplementing and if need be, replacing the older ones which in the normal course of events, have to go. There is and remains always a vast scope for improving any technique. The emergence of Somatic Inkblot Society and SIS Journal are welcome steps in this direction.

Verma Views are bound to differ and controversies likely to occur, but knowledge has to grow with advent of any new technique. In future, perhaps greater variations of inkblot techniques and/or with greater freedom of expressions of responses to the existing inkblot techniques, as well as more imaginative use of these responses, may occur. Till then – even changeling addition is to be welcomed and hopefully – will be for the best of all concerned. S.K. Verma Ph.D. Addl. Professor Div. Of Clinical Psychology, Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh – 160 012 (India)

SIS J. Proj. Pst. & Ment Health (1994) 3: 3-23 Wilfred, A. Cassell, M.D., FAPA, APC, Consultant Psychiatist, SIS Center, 4501E, 104th Evenue, Anchorage, Alaska – 99519 (USA). E-mail : siscassell@yahoo.com B.L. Dubey, Ph.D. D.P.M., D.M.&S.P., Fiacp, Director SIS Center India, E-mail : sisdubey@rediffmail.com The Use of the Rorschach and Somatic Inkblot Series in Releasing Somatic Grief Wilfred A. Cassell and B.L. Dubey The SIS (SIS-I and SIS Video) and the Rorschach test was administered to a 42 years female patient. This SIS and the Rorschach were able to bring out her inner cry and depressive contents related to her father’s death due to cancer and her own recovery after cancer. SIS images have been found a powerful media to take the person back in time and creating hypnotic like effect helping the person in catharsis and finally proving to be an effective therapeutic tool. Responses given by the patient on the Rorschach and the SIS-I and SIS-Video are interpreted using content analysis and psychoanalytic interpretations. In recent years, the subject of death has been explored from a number of standpoints (Kubler-Ross, 1969, Neild, 1990). When a parent dies, the psychological impact ordinarily is very great (Myers, 1986). Sometimes the grief may be prolonged over the course of several years (Doka, 1989), resulting in Major Depression and various conversion reactions involving the experience of somatic pain. There are many stages in the grief process. One involves the appearance of the deceased person’s body or aspects of the body in the individual’s dreams (VonFranz, 1984). This is one way for the individual to experience spiritual and psychological contact with that individual and to deny the pain of the loss so that sleep can occur. The dreamer, when awake, realizes that it is “just a dream”, and will then feel the emotional discomfort and continue in the normal grieving process. Occasionally- especially at night-the images of the person will spill over into conscious awareness in the form of hallucinations when the deceased person will appear as a ghostlike figure and sometimes talk. The lay public has referred to these hypnologic phenomena involving images of the departed loved one as “ghosts”. Images of the deceased person’s body may be projected onto inkblots (Cassell, 1980) and video stimuli having human and anatomical content. This process will be illustrated by presenting the case history of a woman, who had lost her father several years resulting in depression, and required antidepressant medication earlier, resulting in depression, and required antidepressant medication. Psychologically, she closely identified herself with him in her own body gestalt. She had developed painful somatic symptoms in her chest, mimicking those, which he had experienced in dying of cancer of the lung.

4 Casell &Dubey A transcript of a video interview completed with this grieving person and the authors follow: Dr. C: I appreciate your coming here today and could you tell us a little bit about the extent of your depression and how it relates to your father’s death and so on? Mrs. X: Miss him. I could always talk to him. He made me feel good. And even now I sometimes still feel it was my fault that he was sick. Dr. C: What was his sickness? Could you tell us? Mrs. X: He had cancer and it went into his bones and then he died shortly after we got back. We were gone when we found out that he had cancer. And we got back to Alaska in June of 83 and it just wasn’t my father. Dr. C: Yeah. Mrs. X: He had changed quite a bit from the chemotherapy and that. Dr. C: What were the changes you saw in your father with this cancer and how did that impact you at the time? Mrs. X: Well, when I first saw him he was just, he was sitting in the corner of my mother’s kitchen and he was just little thin old man with hardly any hair. He couldn’t talk because he’d had a couple strokes and he had a hard time with that. Dr. C: How old was he at the time? Mrs. X: He was 56. Dr. C: So that must have been hard for you to see that? Mrs. X: Especially when I saw him the summer before and he was. We had gotten closer and I guess I could just talk to him. Dr. C: Could you tell us if you had images of your dad in dreams? Mrs. X: Yes, he looked like my father and not like this person that I saw when we came back. Dr. C: How would you feel when you saw your father the way he used to be in your dreams? Mrs. X: Secure. Dr. C: Yeah, you loved your dad. And then when you’d wake up how would you feel when you realized it was just a dream? Mrs. X: I would feel very upset, umh some I would really kind of feel like I was, when I woke up and found that he wasn’t there, that was the dream and that the dream I have of being with him was real.

SIS in Somatised Grief 5 Dr. C: Did you ever have visual experiences or sense his presence in the waking state? Mrs. X: Yes, sometimes I’ve walked through the malls and might have gotten a glimpse of someone, a gentleman walking or shopping and I would have to look again because I thought it was my father. Dr. C: And what emotions would you feel at the time? Mrs. X: It kind of scared me a little bit but they were high but when I realized it wasn’t my father they were.... I felt very bad. Dr. C: Yes. I appreciate your sharing. I know it’s very painful. It will help to continue in getting some of the grief out. One of the things we noticed was when you looked at these ink blots you saw things resembling your father. And at this time I was going to have Dr. Dubey go over the results of the Rorschach with certain of the cards so I’d appreciate if you would share with him as well, O.K. Thank you. Dr. D: I would like to know little more about the images that you have already seen. You have responded on card #2 something like “Cancer cells...” Mrs. X: It’s just. Dr. D: Would you tell something more about it? Mrs. X: It just reminds me of the cancer cells eating him up inside and him having a hard time not being able to speak because of the strokes. Dr. D: I’m sorry. Can you think of something more on this card? Mrs. X: Just the cancer and the blood. Wondering where the blood went because my father was cremated. Dr. D: On card #8 you perceived “there is an arm in the center and there are two persons grabbing and pulling me down”. will you tell little more about this? Mrs. X: He was my son and my mother, you know it just feels like I try to talk to my mother and I try to do what she wants me to do and I try to please her and to please my son too and I can’t do it. I’m having a hard time. Dr. D: Yes. Of the two persons, one is your mother and the other one your son, is that so? And are they helping each other? Mrs. X: Well, my son he tries sometimes. He sticks up for me when he knows I’m being pushed into a corner. He has this feeling. My mother, I love her, but I have a hard time getting her to stand by me.

6 Casell &Dubey Dr. D: May be it reminds you that at this juncture when you really needed her help she was not that helpful? Mrs. X: She thinks it’s all in my head. Dr. D: Take care. On card #9 your response was “A person hiding behind and feeling ashamed like me”. What makes you feel like that? What makes you feel ashamed? Mrs. X: I’m just ashamed of myself because I can’t seem to do what everybody wants me to do and like I said before I feel responsible for my father’s death. For being bad when I was younger. And I just don’t want anybody to see... Dr. D: Please take care. It was a painful disease. And why you felt responsible for his death and why you blame yourself? Mrs. X: Because I feel if I had been a better daughter. I just feel that they took it out on him to punish me and uh for being the oldest I just feel like I didn’t set a good example for the other kids but yet I was treated like the youngest a lot. Dr. D: So you think yourself as a bad girl and your father was being punished for your mistakes. Mrs. X: You see I came up here. We were in the States and I came up the summer before for vacation. I was under a doctor’s care there and I was having some problems and I didn’t spend the time I wanted to with him then. And we were getting closer and closer together and I had to leave. It was recommended by a doctor that I go back to be with my doctor there so I had to cut my trip short and leave him before we really got a chance to get a lot of things said. Dr. D: O.K. This is card #10. And you said, “This is an explosion. There is something coming out of mind.” What makes you to think so? Mrs. X: It makes me think of me. I keep a lot of things inside. I don’t yell that much at my son. I just let things that happen to me. I keep inside and then when it reaches a certain point I just lose it. And I try to talk and explain what’s going on and I can’t because I’m so nervous and crying and then when it’s over I feel ashamed. I feel like I’ve done something wrong. Dr. D: And by seeing “something is coming out” might be giving a sort of release, release of tension, how is that? Mrs. X: By not keeping it in anymore. By finally saying something to someone. Like I say I have a hard time because I just start crying and shaking and I can’t get it out. I just sometimes feel like I want to explode because I can’t take any more.

SIS in Somatised Grief 7 Dr. D: Is that a feeling of helplessness? Mrs. X: Yes. Dr. D: Now let us review your response on the SIS-I. You have selected card #20. as the most threatening image to you. And here you have perceived”. It’s like death coming to me. May hurt me”. Please elaborate a little more. Mrs. X: It’s just coming to get me. I think about a lot and I, like I say I’m afraid of dying. And it’s coming. Dr. D: Are you still so much afraid that it might come at any time and it may hurt you? Please tell about this. Mrs. X: I’m afraid that it’s gonna come very soon and I worry about my son when it happens and my husband but mainly my son. I don’t feel I have done very well as far as health goes this year and I’m scared. I don’t want to die right now. Dr. D: On card #12 you have seen blood. May be the card is of red color and probably this red color reminds you of blood.. Would you say more about this? Mrs. X: It’s mine, my father’s you know everything. All the problems that I’ve had where I’ve lost blood and my father losing all of his blood somewhere and it’s just all together. Dr. D: How that blood has come? Mrs. X: Through surgery and death. Dr. D: What kind of surgery? Mrs. X: Surgeries that I’ve had and death of my father. Dr. D: Please take care. I’m going to show you another card, card #18 of SIS. And you have perceived “the gate of hell”. Would you tell about this gate of hell. Mrs. X: Well, it just looks like the gate of hell. The teeth are the gates that are opening that you walk through. The eyes are watching you to make sure that you do come. It’s like it’s waiting for me. That’s where I’m going to go because I wasn’t good. Dr. D: It’s very painful. Mrs. X: It’s scary. Dr. D: Yeah. Is it the whole thing or just the eyes watching you and waiting for you? Mrs. X: It’s the mouth opening up and as I go through closing in on me. Dr. D: Does it still remind about your father?

8 Casell &Dubey Mrs. X: I’m afraid that’s where my father is. Dr. D: On card #5, you said “pain” . What sort of pain? Mrs. X: It’s the pain eating inside. The pain that my father felt. The pain that I feel when I need him and he’s not there. Dr. D: Can you imagine this red spot inside? Mrs. X: It’s like a disease. Dr. D: What sort of disease is that? Mrs. X: Cancer. Dr. D: Yeah. Mrs. X: I’m scared of cancer. I had it once before, got over it but it kind of. It’s like, first they said the cancer is looking good, that it was getting smaller and then all of a sudden he started getting bone pain and it was in his bones. Dr. D: Can you relate these red spots? Do they look like something to you? Mrs. X: Right now they just look like little people that are trying to take him over. They want to get in and spread more. Dr. D: Can you think of who they might be? Mrs. X: Just a disease. Dr. D: It’s really very painful to think of your father and his disease. This is card #6 of SIS. Right here you have said “a child in tension.” Can you tell more about this child? Mrs. X: Well, the child is used to having just a mother around and now he had to learn that the mother has met someone and that they are going to be husband and wife and that the mother has to build her life around the husband and the child doesn’t understand it because he had always had the mother’s attention. Dr. D: Does this child reminds you of anything? Mrs. X: My son. Dr. D: Yeah. Mrs. X: Yeah, it was just him and i for quite a while and then I met my husband and I tried to please, you know, my son and my husband . It was hard. My son needed to build his life around us and you know, we had problems because I would be upset when my husband would punish him. I would say things in front of my son.

SIS in Somatised Grief 9 Dr. D: Just to save him? Mrs. X: Yeah, and I shouldn’t have. I should know. I just wanted Kevin to grow up and be loved. You know he deserves that. Dr. D: Yeah, and now the last card. This is #19 of the SIS and here you saw “something is dying”. What is that? Mrs. X: It’s like the slow death my father had. I mean it was fast but yet it was slow painful. A person or thing is just laying there helpless and not being able to move. say anything who ever once in a while open his eyes and look around and see that the family is there with him. And there is nothing he can do and he tries to speak but he can’t and he just slowly starts dying. Dr. D : Take care. Now I wish to discuss some of your responses on SIS/Video images. On image 2A you perceived “a bad life with lots of uncertainty”. Would you like to tell about this? Mrs. X: It’s not knowing what’s going to happen next. And it has been a bad life, maybe not for me but I have put my husband through an awful lot and my son. Insecurity had made me afraid that my husband will find some one else. Someone who is better for him. I give everything I have but I sometimes don’t feel that it’s enough. Dr. D: On next image # A3 you saw “it’s flower and beautiful” but later on you said that it’s a flower with roots and an insect is eating the roots. Mrs. X: That’s what it looked like. Dr. D: Can you elaborate little more? Mrs. X : It’s just that there are something that are beautiful and some people that want to destroy. And my husband is a very good man and sometimes I feel that I am dragging him down. So I feel like I’m the beetle eating the root because I kind hurt his career so. Dr. D: It is very painful. Let’s go ahead on image A13. You have seen “man’s hand reaching for help”. What’s that? Mrs. X: My father reaching from the pits of hell. My father wasn’t a bad man but he had problems and ......... Dr. D: Is that his hand in need of help? Mrs. X: Reaching out for somebody to help him. Dr. D: Do you think that he got the help he needed? Mrs. X: Sometimes.

10 Casell &Dubey Dr. D: Yeah. Mrs. X: Then when I think back on some of the things I did, he didn’t. Dr. D: So the help and support he should have given, he didn’t. I’m sorry. Let’s proceed further on image #A21. Mrs. X: Right here. Dr. D: On A21 you have seen “a man is being torn apart by sickness”. Who is that man? Mrs. X: My father being torn apart with cancer. Dr. D: Your father? Mrs. X: Being eaten up with cancer. Dr. D: You perceived on image A26 “baby” trapped in a ball and that baby is not able to come out”. Will you describe about this? Mrs. X: I had to have a hysterectomy because I had cancer and my sister was pregnant and she didn’t want to have any more children and she went and had an abortion. Dr. D: Oh! I am sorry. Mrs. X: And to me this child that never had a chance to live and that she could have more children and I couldn’t. Dr. D: Take care. On image B2 you have said “cancer eating up all good cells”. So again you are thinking... Mrs. X: My father. Dr. D: Let’s proceed to image #B3. You perceive people, man and woman sitting in a house on fire”. Mrs. X: It’s, I don’t know it just looked like two people that were sitting there and that really didn’t realize what’s going on around them. Dr. D: Don’t they realize? Mrs. X: What’s going on. It’s like they’re not there. Dr. D: Um huh. Will they be able to save themselves? Mrs. X: I feel that way sometimes. Dr. D: And on image 9B you have seen “bad lungs”. What do you mean by bad lungs?

SIS in Somatised Grief 11 Mrs. X: My father had lung cancer and the last chest x-ray that had it didn’t look too good and it just scares me. Dr. D: Sorry. Mrs. X: ‘Cuz I don’t want to die of cancer. I don’t want to go like my father did. Dr. D: Proceed further to image B20. You saw “brain covered by bad cells”. What is that? Mrs. X: Cancer cells in the brain. Dr. D: Last image on SIS video B22, you saw “a man lying down with a bad pain”. Mrs. X: Bad pain. Fire in his stomach. It just looked like there, that his stomach was on fire. Dr. D: Can you tell more about this? Mrs. X: It was like fire, you know the smoke and uh the pain and my father was hurting very badly in the hips and around there. Dr. D: You have not listed the three images which you liked the least. May be you weren’t able to select 3 images. Mrs. X: I wasn’t really able to. It was hard because the cards they really make me nervous and they’re hard for me and I didn’t like them. Very few did I....I just didn’t like them. I felt agitated, I mean not agitated but nervous. I just wanted to forget about them. Dr. D: But it helped you in releasing lots of emotions, pent up tensions and feelings making you to feel sad, I guess. Mrs. X: Well they are. Dr. D: How do you feel after taking the test? Mrs. X: Drained. Sometimes better. And then sometimes it just brings up memories of watching my father die in the hospital. ‘cuz, we didn’t leave his side until the end’. Because my husband was stationed in the states. And I was in and we found out we were coming back. Just before we left I was in an P I ward in Virginia and they were trying to help me. They were trying to help me get to, I guess, get ready for what I was going to see. It was a really big change and Dr. D: It’s very painful. Mrs. X: I guess nobody could prepare you for that. But then when he went in the hospital the last time I stayed there day and night, all of his kids did. We slept on the floor and in the halfway. We all stayed there with my mother until it was over.

12 Casell &Dubey Dr. D: Thank you for sharing your agony with me. We’ll be meeting again. Dr. C: Dr. Dubey thank you very much for the sensitive and probing interview with Mrs. X. It seems we have a powerful approach with the combination of the Rorschach and the SIS (card from and then the video). As I indicated to you, a sensitive, caring psychologist and a patient with sufficient ego strength that she can face pain even though the grief goes back a number of years and is very intense. I wanted to ask you some questions in terms of how you feel the Rorschach and the SIS helped us clinically. And especially as it relates to therapy. As you know I have been very interested in a content analysis approach. I had the previlege years ago of working with Professor Seymour Fisher on the Rorschach and SIS anatomical responses presented by people who had somatic symptoms. Ultimately, I realized that we needed projective stimuli with more anatomical content and so on and have been stimulated originally by reviewing some of Dr. Schafer’s work on the psychoanalytic content analysis and others more recently such as Lerner (1991). It was fascinating for me to realize that you had met Piotrowski toward the end of his life and that he himself was interested in psychoanalytic content analysis. Could you share about that please, especially in terms of Mrs. X’s responses? Dr. D: I use both the tests SIS and Rorschach on clinical cases. The SIS provides more vital information and it is a quick test for diagnosis and screening. The SIS is backed by theories of Body Symbolism and Inner Cry (Cassell, 1980). The theories are very impressive and exciting. About 40 percent of cases in hospitals particularly in psychiatric set up have somatic manifestation, and the causes are psychological in nature. Dr. C: Exactly. A lot of people cannot verbalize their emotional issues and tend to somatize. In medical and hospital physicians and nurses who focus on the physical symptoms reinforce set up it. Many either do not have time or the training to work on the psychological issues are not adequate. Dr. D: Yeah. And more often I have found that people express their psychological problems through physical symptoms. Dr. C: Yes. Dr. D: So the test is very helpful in detecting the psychological problems, the inner cry of the patient as in the case of Mrs. X’s. The medicine (anti-depressant) is not going to help her much. Her problem is probably because of her psychological/emotional attachment with her father, which she is unable to resolve after his death.

SIS in Somatised Grief 13 Dr. C: The anti-depressant medicine helps her to feel better symptomatically. The symptoms are removed and so on but it doesn’t get to the core difficulty, the grieving process and her irrational thoughts. Dr. D: Exactly. As you have noticed that the SIS-video images have created hypnotic like effect and she started coming out. It helps in understanding the psychopathology of the case and releases tensions of the person undergoing the test. And you could notice her face; she was feeling released and cheerful. Dr. C: She got relief. As time goes on, in my own career, I have moved from an interest in the diagnostic aspects really to the therapeutic and I am much more interested in the techniques that help people, that release feelings and help them understand themselves. Dr. D: Many psychologists working in teaching set up and not really trained in handling patients do not believe much in projective tests and particularly in inkblot procedure. They believe more in questionnaires because it does not require any training and sophistication in interpretation. Dr. C: That’s right. It’s also true in this country that some of the authorities on Rorschach who give seminars do not see a broad range of patients anymore. They are so removed that they’re missing some of the richness of clinical work. I wonder if we could go through at this time and have you comment on some of the specific color responses. Please begin with her Rorschach responses and then SIS. Dr. D: All four cards Nos 2,8,9 and 10 were very informative and effective in this case. Dr. C: Yes. Dr. D: She was very upset on chromatic cards. Dr. C: They carry the punch in terms of the affect. Dr. D: She was unable to control her emotions and all through she was sobbing. She was crying like a child during the interview session. Dr. C: Yes. So she really went back in time to the original loss of the father. So this pulled her back and facilitated release of the pent up grief. Dr. D: Right. And it is really difficult to put such responses under closed scoring categories. For example, on Card #8 she says “I feel like as I am in the center and two persons are pulling me from each other. And that one side is my mother and on the other side my son”. Such responses can be interpreted only by its content analysis. Dr. C: Correct.

14 Casell &Dubey Dr. D: And this is how the inner cry can be trapped through content analysis. Dr. C: Exactly. Dr. D: What she perceived is her real situation. Dr. C: It makes it more real when you have a stimulus than just talking in generalities in an interview. Dr. D: Exactly. And on card #9 again she perceived “ a person hiding behind and feeling ashamed like me”. This is true projection, which one can never imagine on questionnaires. Dr. C: Yes. Dr. D: And such feeling that “I have let them down, especially my father”. “I feel like I am a bad girl and my father is being punished for me”, is common in paranoid Schizophrenics. However, such responses are possible due to excessive unreleased grief. Dr. C: Right. Dr. D: And on the basis of such responses you cannot put her under schizophrenia. Dr. C: That’s right. Dr. D: Such responses can be explained through psychoanalytic interpretation. Dr. C: Yes. Dr. D: She is blaming herself because she could not attend to her father when he needed her. It is her guilt feeling for not attending to her father during distress though her health did not allow her to attend to her father. Dr. C: Yes. She was helpless. Dr. D: She felt that as a child it was her duty to help her father whom she could not do and because of this she is calling herself a bad child. Dr. C: So it is very important that the therapist ultimately go back and make these interpretations. Dr. D: Exactly, this is what Dr. Piotrowski (1985) explained me when I visited him at his Logan’s Square home in Philadelpha in July 1985. He explained that do not give more emphasis on indices such as M, FM, C, Popular, and Form and try to understand the meaning behind the contents. Dr. C: Yes.

SIS in Somatised Grief 1 5 Dr. D: Because after all why psychological tests are done? It is only to help in getting more and more information about the patient. Dr. C: We want information, which is clinically relevant to the therapy process. Dr. D: Exactly, and that is why out of 62 images on SIS, I was interested only in a few images giving more clues. Dr. C: Right. What is your feeling about rating the images for their degree of threat and then starting with those that are most threatening? Dr. D: The images rated as most threatening help in understanding the psychopathology of the subject. Such images depict specific body imagery and traumatic experiences way back in time. In fact it is not the 20 cards of SIS-I or 62 images of SIS -II/Video but the three most threatening images which will provide you signals to peep into the inner self of the subject. Dr. C: Yes. Dr. D: And you make depth interview to understand the causes of threat/repression. Dr. C: And then in instances where there is somatic repression then only those that are relevant. Dr. D: Exactly, may be out of 20 you have only five or six cards to go through. Dr. C: Right. Dr. D: Other cards you can leave aside. Dr. C: And with the video technique you are not there so it doesn’t take that long to process such material. Dr. D: Exactly. And even on SIS-I card #20 she said “It is death coming to me, it’s hurting me. It is about to take me. I am afraid of dying”. Unprocessed grief comes like this. Dr. C: Yes. Dr. D: It is painful to imagine but there are many more such persons facing to cancer bravely. Dr. C: Excuse me. In the book “Body Symbolism (Cassell, 1980)” the last chapter deals with death anxiety. And characteristically, as you know, people deny death as an issue. And we have a technique here on some of those death related cards you can introduce it clinically and deal with it. Dr. D: Yes, she has projected the fear of death by giving responses such as “Gate of

16 Casell &Dubey Hell” on card #18. Further she said “I have to go inside-my father has already gone inside”. One can see the sort of fear and insecurity in her. Dr. C: There’s a lot of rage associated with this. Part of the problem with her is that she hasn’t gotten in grips with her anger for her father for leaving and the way he died and some of the old childhood problems as well. Dr. D: And on card #19 she said “I’m going to die and my father died and maybe in the near future something is going to happen to me”. Dr. C: Would you be concerned about suicidal ideation with her in view of this death preoccupation? Dr. D: Well, she has maintained ego strength and attached with her son and husband, because of this the chances of suicidal is very less. Dr. C: Yes. Dr. D: And that is why she is not talking about suicide. Dr. C: Yes. Dr. D: She is aware of her medical profile. Her strength is still her consideration and caring attitude towards her family. Dr. C: Yes. She has also a positive relationship with her husband and other people who love her. Dr. D: And if the person has gone through such traumatic experiences she is bound to give such responses on SIS images. Dr. C: Thank you for your most interesting comments. What would you recommend in terms of someone considering the use of the SIS as opposed to existing techniques including non projective tests? Dr. D: What I have noticed that while taking the questionnaire people have to restrict their choice to yes or no, true or false, agree or disagree. Most of the time these questionnaires have cultural loading. Contrary to this you are free to project your feelings and emotions on inkblot tests. Somatic Inkblot Series is the latest and most powerful amongst the inkblot tests. Dr. C: Yes. Dr. D: And in fact, in one of my studies where I tried to find correlation between Rorschach and SIS, It turned to be quite low, reason being the Rorschach measures the basic personality and is used as diagnostic test. The SIS is a diagnostic as well as therapeutic instrument. It helps in understanding the

SIS in Somatised Grief 17 psychopathology of the case. It further helps to peep into the inner deep and hearing the inner cry of the suffering individual and you can get more information which is not possible through tests like the Rorschach and the Holtzman. This SIS is not against the Rorschach test but it is further extension of the Rorschach. The SIS was tried in India during selection and was found to be a successful instrument in getting the right man on job. Dr. C: Yes. Dr. D: So the SIS covers both the aspects diagnostic as well as therapeutic. The best part of SIS-II and video is its self-administration. It can also be administered in-group. It reduces test’s anxiety because the subject is alone while taking the test. It helps in true projection. The test can be taken even at home or while waiting for his turn in the clinic. So because of these qualities it is the best projective test. Dr. C: And there are variations in the use of SIS test. For example, currently I am interested in administering the procedure at bedtime and seeking at what extent some of the images are picked up in the individual’s dreams by doing the interpretation of dream work the following morning. Well, thank you very much. Dr. Dubey. Your comments have been most helpful and I have learned a great deal from you in terms of your own experience with the SIS and sometimes one can get too close to a procedure but I think it has been very helpful and thank you. Dr. C: We’ve had the opportunity to look at an individual who has lost her father and see how this has affected her responses to the Rorschach and the SIS both in the card form and the video. Hopefully this material, as time goes on, may be brought up in therapy in ways, which will help her express the inner cry and further move ahead in resolving the blocked grief. As an experienced clinician might well imagine, it is not just a matter of prying at the pain to release feelings. In addition, there needs to be definitive cognitive therapy in terms of helping her deal with some irrational thinking that she has relative to her pathological guilt. Similarly, she needs further insight into, how the sympathetic identification with her father’s deteriorating body image contributed to her converting the diseased anatomical imagery into repressed affect, leading to physical symptoms of chest pain and marked cancer phobia.

18 Casell &Dubey Copies of the videotape of this interview completed in 1991 may be obtained by writing to the authors. This may be sent to those interested individuals who might wish to use it for teaching purposes. Even though Mrs. X’s signed a statement giving permission for its educational release, it is not available in the United States or Canada to protect her confidentiality. The authors apologize for the lack of editing in the transcript, but it is our belief that if one employs a case history phenomenological approach, accuracy in reporting is far more valuable to the scientific methodology than grammatical organization. References: Cassell, W.A.(1980) body Symbolism and Somatic Inkblot series, Northen Light Pub. Inc. Anchorage. Doka, K.J. (1989) Difeoretesial Sig Lexington Books, Lexington, Massachusetts. Dubey, B.L. (1982) A pragmatic view of Rorschach Inkblot technique, National Psychological Corporation, Agra India. Fiske, D.W. and Baughman, E.E. (1953) Relationship between Rorschach Scoring Categories and the total number of responses. The journal of Abnormal and coial Psychology48: 25-32. Kramer, H. (1993) Conversations at Midnight, Morrow and Coy Inc. New Yourk Ny. Kubler- Ross, E. (1969) ON DEATH AND DYING, New Yourk Macillan. Lerner, P. (1991) Psychoanalytic Theory and the Rorschach, The Analytic Press, New Jersey Myers, E. (1986) when Patient Die, Viking Penguin Inc., NY, New Yourk. Piotrowski, Z. (1985) Psychoanalytic Interpreting of Rorschach responses, Personal Communication Von-Fraz, M.L. (1984) On Dreams and Death, Shubkala, Boston.

SIS J. Proj. Pst. & Ment Health (1994) 3: 19- A Comprehensive Profile of Personality Characteristics of Male Drug Addicts Anjana Mukhopadhuau, Shabhra Bannerjee & Gopa Mttra The study aimed to measure the depression level of the addicts and explore the role of diagnostic indices for them. A card form of SIS-I and Back Depression Inventory were administered on a sample of 50 drug addicts, divided into three subcategories, namely, Heroin (N=22), Brown Sugar (N=16) and Tidigesic abuse (N=12). Objective measure of depression was analyzed with the help of projective measures in terms of pathology and qualitative response indices to predict a comprehensive personality pattern of drug addicts. Results revealed covert depressive trait among narcotic drug addicts. Besides a clinical pathology, their attempt to follow a normative patter points to the possibility of overcoming the helpless practices of drug dependence. Practice of drug intake provides psychopharmacological effects o the body, which influence the behavioral aspects of the addict. As the body physically adapts to the drug, the effect gradually lessens and a compulsive. psychological need promotes the abuse towards drug addiction. The whole affair, which leads to the painful circumstances and submission to opioids (narcotic drug) or hallucinogens (non-narcotic drug), which alters the psychic perception of reality Several studies document the vulnerability of personality patterns of drug addicts for the stressful life events (Mules and Hague, 1972; O. Doherty & Davis, 1987; Kumar & Mukhopadhayay, 1995). Peer influences available of drugs, unemployment or boredom are certain most common factors found affirmatively associated with drug addicts (Steer, et al., 1980; Rahman, 1992). Personality features so far observed in the foregoing research focused on measures i.e., socialization, flexibility, empathy, conformity and adventure seeking traits as having discriminative associations with marijuana non users and user (Hogan, et al., 1970; Kay, et al., 1978); male heroin addicts were found significantly depressed due to unemployment, previous treatment failures and living with another addict (Steer, et al, 1980) while female heroin addicts were reported depressed due to their higher negative expectancies for future (Beck, et. al., 1984). Craig (1982) observed that heroin addict are apparently gregarious and pose selfassurance with inner feelings of self-doubt, fear, hostility and depression. Tidigesic abuse, a semi synthetic derivative of opium available in intravenously injectable buprenorphine was introduced in India in the last decade principally to combat opioid withdrawal such as a substitute for heroin (Singh, et al., 1992). Initially it was recognized Anjana Mukhophayay, Ph.D., Lecture in Psychology, M.M.V., Banaras Hindu University Varanasi – 221 005, Shubhra Baberjee, Ph.D., Reader and Incharge, Psychology Section, Arya Mahila Degree College Varanasi. , Gopa Mitra, M.A., Research Scholar, Deptt. of Psychology, Babaras Hindu University, Varanasi.

20 Mukhopadhyay et. al. as a self opiate analgesic with low abuse potential, gradually introduced buprenorphine diazepam cocktail to experience the “kick” and an increasing trend of vascular complications reported which is warned to lead to life threatening crisis (Basu, et al. 1994). ‘Depressants’ which are responsible for the depressive behavior of drug addicts of opiate category are assumed to reflect some significant contents through projective indices. Present investigation focuses upon three categories of drug addicts, namely, Heroin, Brown sugar and Tidigesic, all of which belong to narcotic drugs or opioid category. This attempts to explore the comprehensive personality patter of the said abusers by objective measures. Objective: 1. To study the depression level of the drug addicts. 2. To assess the role of diagnostic indicators for the drug addicts. Method: Sample: The sample in the present study consisted of 50 male drug addicts (Mean age-26 years) registered for treatment at the Drug Deaddiction Centre, Vinayake, Bhelupura, Varanasi. The sample classified into 3 sub categories on the basis of their practice of drug abuse, i.e. Heroin (N=22), Brown Sugar (N=16) and Tidigesic (N=12). Tools: 1. Hindi version of Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) (Prashant, 1988). This is an objective questionnaire containing 20 items. Each item is rated on 4 point scale, 0-3 measuring severity of depression. Total rating reflects the depression level. 2. Somatic Inkblot Series – I (SIS) Cassell, 1980) consists of 20 inkblot images that provide enough obvious anatomical structure to evoke spontaneous verbalization making repressed material more accessible to the person taking the test. Responses are evaluated on four pathological scales, i.e. Pathologic Anatomy Score (PAS), Depression (D), Hostility and Aggression Scale (Has) and Paranoia (P). Results: The sample of 50 drug addicts, which is divided into three groups, as per their drug dependency, belongs to the opioid category. Table 1 provides the Mean, SD and t values of the three addict groups indicating that all the three groups are equally highly depressed. The uniformity in their depression scores is again proved, as the t values for the mean differences are not reaching the level of statistical significance.

personality of Drug Addicts 21 Table 1 Comparison of Depression Score (BDI) Between Drug Addicts Addicts N M SD Groups t-values Heroin 30.14 5.25 Heroin Vs 0.71 Brown Sugar Brown Sugar 31.63 7.31 Heroin Vs 0.17 Tidigesic Tidigesic 29.67 10.70 Brown Sugar 0.56 Vs Tidigesic Note: All t values are statistically insignificant. Means and S.D of the four quantitative measures of the SIS test i.e., PSA, D, HAS and P have been reported ion Table 2. The ‘t’ values reveal (Table 3) that the mean differences are negligible between the groups, in terms of projective response measures. Only Brown Sugar addicts were found to have significantly higher mean PAS (p<. 01) and mean HAS (P<. 05) scores than the Tidigesic abuser. All the other ‘t’ values are not significant. One was analysis of variance implied for each qualitative measure obtained by 3 addiction groups. A similar picture of equidistribution emerge from Table 4 as of SIS quantitative measures (Table 2.) Mean scores recorded for the three groups i.e. Heroin, Brown Sugar and Tidigesic, for all the qualitative indices, report that the F-ratios are not significant except for animal response (F = 5.00, p<.05) where Tidigesic group may be observed with highest mean. The result thus evidently proves its stability for the projective measures amongst the opiate addicts. Discussion: Depression may be concealed and denied by a subject and function like “masked depression’ (Kielholz, 1974). Present results that measure a uniformly high depressive score among the opiate addicts, do not provide a similar trend in Depression score measured through SIS test. The projection of depression may be traced in the uniformly high anatomical responses, which reflect better reality orientation or concern with self body image. This body awareness again denotes depression (Pershad & Verma, 1995). Depression if not manifested overtly in an uninhibited manner, covert expression is elected either through rejection of cards or preoccupation with body in a hypochondriacal manner and may be projected through anatomical responses which are likely to be pathological (Cassell, 1980).

Table 2 Mean and SD of the SIS Indices Variables P A S D H A S P Addicts M SD M SD M SD M SD Heroin 9.5 9.45 5.00 4.97 5.09 4.64 1.77 1.28 Brown Sugar 12.63 9.65 4.00 3.29 5.31 4.81 1.81 2.16 Tidigesic 4.58 2.93 3.42 4.87 3.50 3.25 1.58 2.14 Table 2A Commparison of SIS Pathological Indices Between Drug Addicts Groups P A S D H A S p Heroin Vs Brown Sugar 0.98 0.68 0.14 0.07 Heroin Vs Tidigesic 1.78 0.86 1.02 0.31 BBroen Sugar Vs Tidigesic 6.88** 0.92 2.74* 0.70 * p < 0.05 ** p < 0.01 22 Mukhopadhyay et. al.

Table 4 Mean Scores and ANOVA of Qualitative Indices Amongst Drug Addicts Mean Scores SIS Images Heroin Brown Tidigesic F-Ration Sugar 1. Typical 6.90 7.13 7.25 0.12 2. Atypical 10.77 10.38 11.17 0.28 3. Most Typical 2.32 2.69 2.08 1.04 4. Human Response 8.23 7.44 7.25 0.42 5. Animal Response 3.73 4.38 6.42 5.00* 6. Sex 4.27 4.31 5.17 0.35 7. Anatomy 12.18 12.13 11.83 0.02 8. Rejection 1.18 0.94 1.50 0.25 *p< 0.05 In an attempt to measure the relationship of projection and pathology, Mustering (1995) observed that clinical patients (psychiatric) respond to internal cues more than to external ones and healthy normal respond to cues provided by the stimulus structures. Dominance of pathological responses have been reported for the Brown Sugar and Heroin addicts while Tidigesic group who have low abuse potentials could not establish the discriminative differences in terms of pathological response. Dubey, et al. (1995) established that clinical groups (schizophrenics and neurotics) respond least number for the Most Typical responses and high Atypical responses. A similar trend corroborates the result for the drug addicts in the present study. Human responses, which could not discriminate the clinical and control groups showing quite a high measure for the drug abusers. Human responses (HR) obtained from the projective test indicate identification. Animal response indicates low socialization as well as frustration, hostility, immaturity and primitive behavior (Dubey, 1982). Human Response measure was found sufficiently high among drug addicts in the present investigation, and Animal Response distinctly low. An excess of Animal response content suggests regression and deviation in adaptability (Pershad and Verma, 1995). Typical response, which is otherwise supposed to be normative response, personality of Drug Addicts 23

was found significantly higher between Heroin and Brown Sugar than R, MT, AR and S responses. This is possibly an indication that drug addict are governed by stimulus structure of the projective test drug addicts are governed by stimulus structure of the projective test with which they respond. Conclusion: This can be concluded from the outcome that the drug addicts uniformly suffer from depression. The pathological indices also indicate the deviation from normal healthy life management. Anatomy responses indicate their hidden depression. Atypical responses reliably confirm their clinical pathology and Typical and Human Responses indicate their attempt of identification and efforts to perceive the world in a normative manner. Responses: Basu, D., Matto, S.K., Arora, A., Malhotra, A. and Verma, V.K. (1994). Pseudomeurysm Injecting Drug Abusers: Cases from India Addiction, 89: 1697-1699. Beck, A.T. Steer, R.A. and Shaw, B.F. (1984) Hopelessness in Alcohol and Heroin Dependent Women, Jl of Clinical Psychology, 40: 602-606. Cassell, W.A. (1990) Manual of Somatic Inkblot Series SIS center, Alaska: Anchorage Cassell, W.A. (1980) Body Symbolism & Somatic Inkblot Series, SIS Centre, Alaska: Anchorage. Craig, R.J. (1982) Personality Characteristics of Heroin addicts – Review of empirical research 1976-79, International Jl. of Addiction, 17:227-248. Dubey, B.L. (1982) a Pragmatic View of Rorschach Inkblot Technique, National Psychology Corporation, Agra. Dubey, B.L., Cassell, W.A. Pershad D., and Dwivedi, P. (1995) Diagnostic Utility of Somatic Inkblot Series, SIS Jl Psychology and Mental Health, 2: 77-84 Hogan, R., Mankin, D., Conway, J., and Fox, S. (1970) Personality Correlates of Under Graduate Marijuana Use, Jl of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 35: 58-63. Kay, E, J., Lyons, A., Newman W., Mankin D., and Loeb, R.C. (1978) A longitudinal Study of the Personality Correlates of Marijuana Use, Jl of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 46: 470-477. Kielholz, P. (1974) Opening Address In P. Kiwlholz, Depression in Everday Practice, Vienna, Austria, Hans Haber. Kumar, R. and Mukhopadhyay, A. (1995) A Comparative Study of Presumptive Stress and Self Discrepancy in Drug Addicts and Normal, Ecological Perspective and Behaviour, 24 Mukhopadhyay et. al.

Deptt. of Psychology, Gurukul Kangri University Hardwar. Mules, J.E. and Hague, W.H. (1972) life Charge its Perception and Alcohol Addiction Journal of Study on Alcoholism, 38: 487-497. Murstein, B.I. (1995) The Relationship of Stimulus, Projection and Pathology in Projective Technique and the “Levels Effect” SIS Jl. of Projective Psychology and Mental Health, 2 : 41-52. O. Doherty, F., and Davis, J.B. (1987) Life Events and Addiction: A Critical Review, British Jl of Projection, 82: 127-137. Pershad, D., and Verma, S.K. (1995) Diagnostic Significance of Content Analysis of SIS-II, SIS Jl. of Projective Psychology and Mental Health, 2: 139-144. Prashant, A. (1988) Psychological Stress in Adolescents: A Study of Depression, Self Esteem and Physical Symptoms, Unpublished Doctoral Thesis, Banaras Hindu University Rahman, A. (1992) Drug Addiction- A Pilot Study in Dhaka City, Personality and Individual Differences, 13: 119-121. Singh, R.A. Matoo, S.K. Malhotra, A., and Verma, V.K. (1992) Case of Buprenorphine Abuse in India, Act Psychiatric Scandinavia, 86: 46-48. Steer, R.A., Emery, G.D. and Beck, A.T. (1980) Correlates of Self Reported and Clinically Assessed Depression in Male Heroin Addicts, Jl. of Clinical Psychology, 36: 798-800. personality of Drug Addicts 25

S.P. Rathee, M.A. (Psy.) Deptt. of Psychiatry, Co,,and Hospital, Chandimanndir Agyajit Singh, Ph.D. Reader, Deptt. of Psychology, Punjab University, Patiala. A Comparative Study of Male and Female on Somatic Inkblot Series-I S.P. Rathee and A. Singh The Somatic Inkblot Series-I was administered to 75 Normal Army Subjects (35 Male and 40 Female), individually, following standard procedures (Cassell, 1980). The results indicated that female subjects gave more number of responses and male subjects rejected more cards. Female subjects gave more of Animal responses and male subjects gave more sexual responses. Results are discussed in details. The Somatic Inkblot Series is an improvement over existing inkblot techniques. It is a structure projective diagnostic instrument and an adjunct to psychotherapy (Cassell, 1990). Here the patient feels more comfortable while perceiving the familiar body parts. Being ambiguous and semi ambiguous, these SIS images appear to be less threatening to react upon. It helps the therapist more sensitively to understand the psychopathology behind the symptoms (Cassell, 1980; Dubey et al, 1993; and Saldana and Dubey, 1995). The Somatic Inkblot Series has five subjects providing more freedom to the experiment in applying any of these according to his choice. The first of these series is a set of 20 cards (SIS-I) and the second is self-administered booklet form (SIS-II). The other three tests are in Video for self-administration. The SIS continues the Rorschach conceptualization that an individual projects his own unique mental imagery to ambiguous and semi ambiguous visual stimuli (Cassell, 1995). Although, all of these series have their own clinical significance yet the SIS-II (booklet version) and SIS-V (Video version) are emerging as the favorite clinical tools among psychiatric and non-psychiatric population. The test has been found very useful in understanding the psychopathology and underlying unconscious conflict, thus helping further in therapeutic planning (Dubey et al 1993; 1994). The Somatic Inkblot Series have been found to be an important diagnostic tool among psychiatric patients in Civil as well as in military conditions (Saldanha and Dubey, 1995; Rathee,et al, 1995). However, the existing data on Somatic Inkblot Series-I (SIS-I) is limited on psychiatric patients, Cardiac cases and male-trans-sexual (Cassell, 1980; Rathee,et al,1994; and Sahay and Srivastava, 1995). There is a paucity of data on normal population. The present study is an attempt to compare the response pattern of male female normal subjects on SIS-I.

SIS-I in Male & Female 27 Material and Method: Sample: To achieve the objectives, 75 normal subjects with army background (35male and 40 female) in the age range of 20 to 35 years with mean age of 25 and 22 years respectively were taken in this study. Most of them were matriculates and were able to take the test. It was ensured that they were free form psychiatric symptoms. Procedures: The Somatic Inkblot Series-I, a set of 20 cards was administered to each subject individually, following standard procedures (Cassell, 1980). The obtained SIS-I protocols were scored and analyzed in the light of set objectives. Results: The responses of male and female subjects were analyzed card wise to make comparison in pattern of responses. Table 1 compares the male and female for their productivity card wise. Table 2 indicates rejection of cards by male and female subjects and Table 3 presents content categories for male and female subjects. Discussion: Card No. 1,2, and 4 were found to be more productive as compared to Card No. 18,19 and 20. The male and female differed significantly in their response productivity on Cards No. 1,2,3,6,9,10,15, 16 and 18. This suggests that the theme of the Card has a significant value, which is different in male and female subjects. Card No.13, 14, 17, 18, 19 & 20 were found to be more difficult because the rejection was more frequent on these cards. Male and female differed in their rejection on card No. 13,14, 17 & 18. Content categories used in responses were wide enough, in the present study, however, only those content categories were evaluated which did the subjects frequently perceive. Most of the subjects perceived Anatomy in contents vague form followed by Human, Animals, Birds, and Botany etc. The result of the study clearly suggested that the vague forms in each cards have differential perceptual value for male female subjects. This leads to think whether uniform norms and standards would be sufficient to compare the protocols of a deviant group of subjects. Probably different norms may be more appropriate. Since the data is based on a particular regimental group of personnel on a small sample, results and conclusions arrived thereupon be considered as suggestive rather than confirmatory.

28 Rathi & Singh Table 1 Comparison of Productivity on SIS-I Between Male and Female Subjects Total Number of Responses Cards Nos. Male (n=35) Female (n-40) 1. 72 (2.05 101 (2.52 2. 80 (2.28) 98 (2.45) 3. 39 (1.11) 56 (1.40) 4. 75 (2.14) 84 (2.10) 5. 64 (1.82) 60 (1.50) 6. 57 (1.62) 73 (1.82) 7. 55 (1.57) 57 (1.42) 8. 68 (1.94) 67 (1.67) 9. 42 (1.20) 68 (1.70) 10. 42 (1.20) 61 (1.52) 11. 46 (1.31) 56 (1.40) 12. 37 (1.05) 47 (1.17) 13. 41 (1.17) 52 (1.08) 14. 35 (1.00) 43 (1.07) 15. 36 (1.02) 55 (1.37) 16. 36 (1.02) 62 (1.55) 17. 41 (1.17) 51 (1.27) 18. 29 (0.82) 52 (1.03) 19. 36 (1.02) 43 (1.07) 20. 32 (0.19) 44 (1.01) Total Responses 1230 (Mean in Parenthesis)

Table 2 Comparison of Rejection of Cards Between Male and Female Subjects Cards No. Rejection Male Female No Rejection 1, 4, 6, 8, 9, 15, 17. 1, 2, 3,4,7,8,9,11,16. Rejection of 1 Card 3, 10, 11, 14,. 6, 15, 18. Rejection 2-4 Cards 2, 7, 12, 16, 19. 5, 10, 12, 13. Rejection of 5 and 13, 18, 20. 14, 17, 19, 20. more Cards Table 3 Comparison Between Contents of Responses Contents Male (N:35) Female (N:40) Human 117 (1,2,3,4,5,12,17, 189 (1,2,3,5,12,16,18, 18,19,20) 19,20) Animals (1,5,7,18,19,20) 198 (1,3,4,5,7,8,14,15,16,19,20) Birds (1,2,5,6,16) 136 (1,2,3,6) Anatomy (2,4,6,7,8,9,10, 278 (2,5,6,7,8,9,10, 11,12,13,15,17) 11,12,13,15,17) Non-Anatomy (2,4,5,7,10,11 54 (2,7,8,9,10,11, 12,15,16,19,20) 14,16,17) Sexual (7,8,11,12,13,14, (11,12,13,14,16) 16,17) Objects (1,2,5,6,7,8,9,13, 95 (1,2,4,5,7,8,9,11, 19,20) 12,13,14,15,17) Botanical (3,4,6,13) 108 (3,4,6,7,8,10,13, 15,17) Others (9,10,11,12,13, 124 (1,2,4,5,6,7,8,9, 14,15,16,17,18, 10,12,13,14,15, 19,20,) 16,17,18,19,20) Pathological (10,11,16,17,20) 7 (1,4,5,18) Responses SIS-I in Male & Female 29

(Card numbers given in parenthesis indicate categories of contents perceived on those cards.) Conclusion: It can be concluded that Male and Female subjects differ significantly on their productivity and pattern of rejection on SIS- I. They were found to have different contents of responses on various cards. The present study needs further work to demonstrate the above contention. References: Cassell, W.A. (1972) Individual Differences in Somatic Perceptions. Advances in Psychosomatic Medicines, 8: 86-104. Cassell, W.A. (1980) body Symbolism & Somatic Inkblot Series Aurora Publishing Co. Anchorage Alaska. Cassell, W.A., Coons, D.S., Robbinon, M.I.R. and Stiltnered, V.S. (1980) Cardiac Awareness in Schizophrenia Body Symbolism and Somatic Inkblot Series PP. Aurora Publishing Co. Anchorage, Alaska Cassell, W.A. (1994) The Somatic Inkblot Series Continuing Rorschach’s Conceptualization SIS Journal of Projective Psychology and Mental Health I: (I) 3-14. Dubey, B.L., Pershad, D. and Cassell, W.A. (1993) Somatic Inkblot Series Evolution and Current Status. The Mind Vol. 19, 2 & 3: 22-31. Dubey, B.L., Cassell W.A. and Pershad, D(1993) Some Experiences with the Somatic Inkblot Series. British Journal of Projective Psychology. 38: I, 19-41. Dubey, B.L. Mishra, M., Dwivedi, C.B. and Mishra, N. (1994) Diagnistic and Therapeutic Utility of Somatic Inkblot Series II and Rorschach. SIS Journal of Projective Psychology and Mental Health I: I, 19-26 Mishra M., Dwivedi, P. and Cassell, W.A. (1994) Somatic Inkblot Series-Video in Adolescents. SIS Journal of Project sychology and Mental Health. I: 1, 27-30. Dharamvir, Pershad, D., Dubey, B.L. and Mann, S.B.S. (1994) Body Imagery in Vertigo Patients. SIS Journal of Projective Psychology and Mental Health 1: (1), 65-72. Rathee, S.P. Goel, D.S., Saldanha, D., Chawala, M.L. and Dubey B.L. (1994) a Study of SIS-I in Coronary Cases. SIS Journal; of Projective Psychology and Mental Health I: (1), 51- 54. 30 Rathi & Singh

Rathee, S.P. Pande, Vijay and Singh, A. (1995) Diagnostic Effect of SIS-II among Psychiatric Patients of Armed Forces: A Preliminary Study. SIS Journal of Projective Psychology and Mental Health 21: 61-66. Sahay, M. and Srivastava, P.K. (1994) somatic Inkblot Series-I in Male Transsexuals. SIS Journal of Prjective Psychology and Mental Health 1: (1) 73-78. Saldanha, D. and Dubey, B.L. (1995) Effect of Sodium Penthol on SIS-V (A): Inkblot Images. SIS Journal of Projective Psychology and Mental Health. 2:1, 19-28. Verma, S.K., Pershad D., Kaur, R. and Nehra, R. (1995) Diagnostic Significance of SIS-II. SIS Journal of Projective Psychology and Mental Health, 2: (1,72-76. SIS-I in Male & Female 31

S.K. Verma, Ph.D. DMSP, DGP, Additional Professorm ,Dwarka Pershad, Ph.D. DMSP, Additional Professor,KusuM Bhagat, M.A., M. Phil., Social Scientist, Rajinder Kaur, M.A. Ph.D., Social Scientist, Dept. of Psychiatry, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education & Research, Chandigarh- 160 012. Interdependence of SIS Variable with Personality Traits in Psychiatric Cases S.K. Verma, D. Pershad, K. Bhagat & R. Kaur PEN and SIS-II were administered on 32 psychiatric patients, in order to find dependence of SIS variables on certain personality dimensions. The result shoes that (a) the number of “Most Popular” responses depend upon the education of the subject (b) Psychotics scores tended to influence Atypical and pathological responses, (c) Neuroticism scores influence number of Typical responses, (d) The lie score was found inversely related to perception of Human, Movement and Pathological response (e) Extraversion was not related to any of the SIS variables. The Somatic Inkblot Series (SIS) was developed from an investigation of body image distortion in women with hirsutism (Fisher & Cleveland, 1968; Hollander & Cassell, 1965) and a study of Rorschach Penetration scores (Cassell, 1964, 1965). Initially SIS was developed in 1960 as a twenty-card set of ambiguous and semi ambiguous inkblots (Cassell, 1980). It claimed to have overcome some of the limitations of the earlier projective inkblot tests (Fiske & Baughman, 1953; Dubey, 1982). The test takes full advantage of new video technology. The theoretical background is sound and is based on the theory of somatic imagery, body symbolism, body perception and cry for help, and there’re a number of alternative tests to be used depending upon the circumstances (Cassell, 1990). It can be used as a self-administered test under supervised instruction, as a ground test as, an individual test and as a video test. The scoring and the interpretation are much simple compared to that of Rorschach and the Holtzman test. This test emphasizes on body summarization theory, therefore only by throwing the ink and folding the paper from the center did not generate the stimulus material. Instead stimulus material was also generated purposefully by making the designs to give some sort of structure, resembling to either internal body organs or external body parts. Inspire of the fact that the Somatic Inkblot Series (SIS) is much simpler, more useful in the therapeutic work; the scientific researches are limited in USA and other countries. Dr. B.L. Dubey has practically launched a crash programmed in India by developing Somatic Inkblot Society, publishing SIS Journal of Projective Psychology and Mental Health and popularizing it by organizing series of workshops and seminars in different universities/centers, holding workshops, seminars and conferences. He could generate interest, but could not satisfy the inquiring minds of some of the clinical psychologists about the significance of various indices proposed for scoring and interpretation in SIS

test, mhops eaning thereby that the validity of the indices is not known theoretically. In this paper, therefore a humble attempt is made to correlate various scoring indices of SIS with the personality dimensions of psychotics, neuroticism and extraversion. These variables of personality dimensions were thought to be more important because they relate to the propensity for the development of psychosis or neurosis in the high scores amongst general population. Objectives: a) To find out interference of SIS variables with psychotics, neuroticism and extraversion dimensions of personality. b) To find out dependence of SIS variables on the educational level of the psychiatric patients Material and Method: Sample: The sample for the study was taken from the patients attending the division of clinical psychology of the Department of Psychiatry attached to the Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research Chandigarh, for psycho diagnostic evaluation. Only those cases were taken where along with routinely required psychometric evaluation, SIS and PEN could also be administered. The total number of subjects who volunteered and took the test were 32. Tools: 1. Somatic Inkblot Series II (Cassell, 1980) was selected for the present research. This consists of 62 images in two series, A and B, each with 31 images. It was self administered under supervised instruction and was scored for 12 variables as recommended in its least manual (Cassell, Dubey & Pershad, 1995). 2. Essence’s PEN inventory consisting of 78items assessing personality dimensions of psychotics, neuroticism extraversion and social desirability (lie scale). 20 items measure each dimension except that in the lie scale, items are 18. The Hindi version of the scale by Menon & Verma (1988) was used. Results: The age of the subjects ranged from 16-50 years with mean of 29.13year. All education above VI class. The ratio of male and female subjects was 2:1. The means and SD’S of SIS variables and of personality dimensions are given in table 1 and 2. Table 3 presents the correlation values of SIS variables with psychoticism, extraversion, neuroticism, lie scale and years of schooling. SIS-I and PEN 33

34 Verma et. al. Table1 Mean & Percentage of Responses of SIS Variables in Psychiatric Cases SIS Variables Mean S.D. Mean% Most Typical 12.41 2.15 22.3 Typical 23.94 6.06 43.0 Atypical 19.28 7.12 34.7 Animal 8.22 3.30 14.8 Human 18.53 4.98 33.3 Anatomical 7.78 4.03 14.0 Sex 1.81 3.48 3.3 Others 19.29 11.09 34.6 Total 55.63 7.90 Pathological 1.06 2.02 1.9 Movement 4.25 4.98 7.6 Rejection of Images 6.38 7.90 10.0 Table 2 Mean & Standard Deviation of Scores on PEN Inventory Variables of PEN Mean S.D. P= Psychoticism 6.41 3.76 N=Neuroticism 9.78 4.89 E=Extraversion 11.78 5.06 L=Lie Scale 7.34 3.51 Discussion: This study was conducted on psychiatric cases, which included cases suffering from psychosis and neurosis almost in equal proportion. The percentage of various SIS variables reported in table 1 are comparable with other reported studies in literature (Dubey et al, 1994; Dwivedi et al, 1995). The scores on personality dimension were also found comparable with studies reported in its manual (Menon and Verma 1988).

Table 3 Correlation of SIS Variables with PEN Variables & Education SIS Variables PEN Variables Education P E N L Most Typical -.07 -.28 .06 -.04 .38* Typical -.22 .25 .34* -.02 .02 Atypical -.37* .11 .07 -.02 -.05 Animal .13 .14 -.27 .07 -.17 Human .13 -.19 .10 -.39* .004 Anatomy .18 .04 -.01 .12 .34* Sex -.10 .17 -.12 .15 .18 Others -.14 .21 -.27 .46* -.02 Pathology .35* -.08 .09 -.43* -.07 Movement .01 .17 .04 -.37* .10 Rejection -.14 -.22 .21 .05 -.08 Total .14 .22 -.21 -.05 .09 *p< .05 Psychoticsm scores at least theoretically are found to be high in psychotic subjects. On SIS, atypical and pathological responses are generally indicative of thinking disturbances (Dwivedi et al 1995; Dubey et al, 1995). It is therefore, likely that psychoticism of PEN and atypical and pathological responses of SIS should correlate significantly. This assumption was sustained of atypical and pathological responses were fund to be significant with psychotic’s scores. Neuroticism was found to be significantly and directly associated with typical responses and animal responses inversely associated with neuroticism scores. No other variables of SIS showed significant relationship with neuroticism scores. Extraversion of Pen inventory had no significant relation with any of the variable of SIS. Neither it was expected so. However, highly extraverted tends to give lesser number of most typical, higher number of typical, lesser rejection and more productive on SIS. Surprisingly lie score of PEN had significant relation with a number of SIS variables. Human, pathological and movement responses had significantly inverse relationship with lie score. Meaning thereby, those who obtained high lie score gave lesser number of human, pathological and movement responses. This type of correlation suggests that those who tend to give socially desirable responses on questionnaire may also manipulate their responses at will on SIS. SIS-I and PEN 35

Education of the patients played a significant role in there perception of vague inkblot images. With increase in education, number of most typical and anatomical responses increased. The significance of these correlations suggested that higher the education greater was the group conformity in thinking and better was their realistic perception of the vague stimuli. This conjecture gests support from the Cassell’s theory that images of SIS were purportedly developed to look like either internal or external body parts. To sum up the results and discussion it appears that psychotics scores are associated with atypical and pathological responses of SIS. The neuroticism scores are associated with typical responses. The tendency to give socially desirable responses affects inversely the perception of human, movement and pathological responses. The social disability or in other world tendency to fake on psychological test should not influence the responses on the projective test in general . Rorschach and Holtzman tests are claimed to be free from this faking (Dubey, 1982). On SIS however, faking appeared to be influencing the perception of an individual. If it is true ten why it is so? The most plausible cause might be that on other established inkblot tests in addition to free association; inquiry is conducted for the percepts. Where as on SIS usually inquiry is not conducted for research and diagnostic purposes. It forms, however an essential component only when SIS is used individually for therapeutic work. This major difference might be responsible, which needs to be further explored, adopting more appropriate research design. Conclusion: The results suggested that the number of “most popular” responses depended upon the education of the subject. Psychotics scores tended to influence atypical and pathological responses. Neuroticism scores influenced number of typical responses on SIS. References: Cassell, W.A. (1964) A projective Index of Body Interior Awareness. Psychosomatic Medicine 26: 172-177. Cassell, W.A. (1965) Body Perception and Symptom Localization. Psychosomatic Medicine, 27: 171-176. Cassell, W.A. (1980) Body Symbolism & Somatic Inkblot Series, Aurora Publishing Co. Anchorage, Alaska. Cassell, W.A. Dubey, B.L. and Pershad, D (1995) Somatic Inkblot Series II Video, Manual SIS Centre, Anchorage. Dubey, B.L. (1982) A pragmatic View of Rorschach Inkblot Technique, National Psychological Corporation, Agra. 36 Verma et. al.

Dwivedi, C.B. Mishra, M., & Dubey (1995) Diagnostic Significance of the Indices of the SIS-II and the Rorschach Inkblot Test SIS Journal of Project Psychology & Mental Health, 2: 165- 170. Dubey, B.L. Cassell, W.A., Pershad, D. and Dwivedi, P. (1995) Diagnostic Utility of Somatic Inkblot Series, SIS Journal of Project Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 48: 25-32. Fisher, S. and Cleveland, S.E. (1968) Body Image and Personality. Princeton NJ, Van No strand Hollender, M.H. and Cassell, W.A. (1965) Psychological Problems Associated with Hirsutism Inernational Psychiatry Clinics, 3:2. Menon, D.K. and Verma, S.K. (1988); manual for Hindi PEN Inventory. Roupa Psychological Centre, Varanasi. Acknowledgment: This is partly based on the research project funded by the P.G.I. research grant. SIS-I and PEN 37

Projective Techniques With Particular Reference To Inkblot Test N.L. Dosajh For assessment of human personality, there are a number of difficulties. Firstly it is rather difficult for human being to assess human beings The person trying to assess the other human being gets automatically involved emotionally and thus become a member of the ingroup and so his assessment becomes colored and biased towards the members of his in group of attempts have been made to assess human personality. The most important methods are:- I Methods of Variable Report II Behavioral Methods III Projective Tests - Inkblot Tests & Others. Here we are concerned with projective methods and especially Inkblot Test. Such methods are based on the phenomenon of projection. In these methods, it is presumed that the individuals try to project their inner feelings, attitudes, attributes, likes and dislikes on the external environments. Human beings have a tendency of environment. In these methods some unstructured or semi-structured material is provided to the subject so as to enable him to project his inner world on this material. We allow the subject to structure the unstructured or semi-structured material in any way he likes. In doing so, he unconsciously projects himself and thus reveals his personality. Vague is the stimulus; the better chances are there for the subject to project. The common unstructured or semi structured materials used in projective tests are: vague and ambiguous pictures, inkblots, incomplete sentences, some model clay, paper and finger paints, haphazard lined, somatic inkblots etc. Some of the important projective tests are: Rorschach, TAT, Make A Picture Story, CAT, Sentence Completion, Figure diagram (Dosajh, Horn hellersburg) Rosenzweig Picture Frustration, Drawing of the Human Figure, Szondi, Sargent’s Paper-Pencil Projective, Story Telling & Completion, Inkblot Tests – Rorschach, Holtzman, Shukla’s Colored Inkblot Technique, Cassell’s Somatic Inkblot Series etc. These projective tests give access to the deeper levels of personality. They are actually the tools, which give the X-ray picture of the deeper levels of the subject’s psyche. In that respect they are superior to inventories, rating scales or questionnaires, which give us only a superficial picture of an individual. The information gleaned through about the subject by the use of self-rating methods like Personality Inventories or Rating Scales may be biased and may not give us a true picture of the personality traits. In the self-inventory method there is a great chance for the subject to deceive the Prof. N. L. Dosajh, Ph.D., 1121 , Sector 15-B, Chandigarh – 160 015

examiner if the subject so desires. The projective tests, on the other hand are real objective tests of personality since in these tests we try to see the difference between the subject’s perception of a situation and the standard perception. The difference in these perceptions reveal to us the distortions – which further point to the inner needs of the individual. These inner needs of the subject, by ordinary tools, may not be accessible to us at all. These latent needs are more important to know for Clinical Psychologists to enable them to help their patents. It is these deeper levels of personality that are going to be the determinants of the behavior of the person for the years to come. So the findings based on projective tests are bound to have a greater predictive value and hence more scientific than the self-ring methods or self life-record observations. Since the act of projecting is an unconscious mechanism, the element of truth in the data obtained is increased. The tested reveals him unconsciously and so there is less chance of distortion of the true personality traits than is possible in other methods of personality appraisal. A complete picture of a personality must take cognizance both of the subjective self and the objective self i.e. we should be able to know “what sort of person the subject is “and also” what sort of person he wants to be”. The integration of these two gives us a true into account both the emotional and rational factors. For study of the former, projective techniques are excellent tools (1958) and especially the Inkblot Tests. It is the last ones, which I will discuss very briefly. Rorschach is the important Inkblot projective tests which is used all over the world by Clinical Psychologists and Psychiatrists for psycho diagnostic purposes, but this test requires the examiner to have lot of experience before he becomes an adept at scoring and interpreting it correctly. The objectivity of this test is only floral and not statistical. It gives a gestalt picture of the personality under study rather than given numerical scores. Of course when this test is handle by experienced Rorschachians, the validity goes very high. Psychometrically it is rather a rack test because of the lack of control on the number of responses given by the subject. So the standardization of this test, as we talk of in the case of other tests like intelligence and Aptitude test is not possible. “On the Other hand , if a refined scoring method induces the examiner to observe, more intimately and accurately than he otherwise could, even with years of experience, just what the Rorschach record offer, then such a “standardization” could be considered a decided advantage” (Klopfer et al,1946). Among the most critical attacks upon the Rorschach was the paper by Zubin (1954). In a sweeping indictment Zubin charged seven major failures as follows: (1) failure to provide an objective scoring system free of arbitrary conventions and showing high inter-score agreement; (2) lack of satisfactory internal consistency or test-retest reliability; (3) failure to provide cogent evidence for clinical validity; (4) failure of the individual scoring categories to relate diagnosis; (5) lack of prognostic or predicative validity with respect to outcome of treatment or later Projective Technique & SIS 39

40 Dosajh behavior; (6) inability to differentiate between groups of normal subjects; and (7) failure to find any significant relationships between Rorschach scores and intelligence or creative ability. Many attempts have been made to overcome the defects of the Rorschach test. One such attempt and a very widely known one is by Dr. Wayne Holtzman(1970). Holtzman abandons the basic idea of using only ten inkblots, of permitting the subject as few or as many responses as he cares to give (1970). He constructed two sets of 45 inkblots, to each of which only one response is given. This was done by Holtzman to improve Rorschach psychometrically. Holtzman and his colleagues did stupendous work on this test and raised the reliability and validity of the test. The standardization process is commendable and reliability, validity and norms have been worked out vary meticulously. The instructions for administration and scoring are give in great detail and a wonderful ‘Guide’ has been prepared for the use of learners. An excellent “Record Sheet Form and “summary Sheet” have been designed to facilitate the work of beginners. All this work is commendable but all these new ventures through highly praiseworthy, yet have introduced other disadvantages in Holtzman tests. It fails to pull out responses, which are important from the diagnostic point of view because the responses elicited by this test are only superficial, and not from the depth of the psyche of the patient, which are more important from the psychodiagnostic point of view. Psychometrically Holtzman has raised the level of this test very high but from the psycho diagnostic point of view the test is nowhere comparable to Rorschach. Holtzman gives percentile norms for college students, Average Adults, 7 th Graders, Elementary School Children, 5 year Olds., Chronic Schizophrenics, Mentally Retarded and Depressed patients but does not attempt to identify different types of Schizophrenics, Depressed patients and different types of Psychoneurotic. So what this test gains psychometrically, it loses diagnostically when compared to Rorschach. Next we take up another attempt of an Inkblot tests to overcome the defects of Rorschach and that is by Dr. Wlfred A. Casselll(1980). He has developed Somatic Inkblot Series. I have been administering this test to my patients for the last ten months only, which is a very short experience to give a correct criticism. Even then I find this test superior to Rorschach on the following points:- 1. It is easier to administer. 2. It is easier to score. 3. Video and Computer have further facilitated its use. 4. The somatic element in it is excellent. I do find that the patients do project in the blots according to their somatic troubles.

5. It is a good psycho diagnostic tool but lot of data needs to be collected before it can reach the level of sophistication and precision in diagnosis comparable to Rorschach. Traits like Intellectual Level and Emotional Maturity can hardly be determined with the help of this test. In a country like India, its therapeutic value has yet to be compared with Ester techniques like Yoga, Panayam, Meditation etc. or in other words with all psycho synthetic techniques (1983). These psycho synthetic techniques in general, seem to be equally effective for treatment purposes. As far as ‘Interactive Action’ between the Psychotherapist and the Subject is concerned, in Rorschach it is far more than in SIS. And for the cure of the patient this interaction between the two plays a very important role. I shall like to quote a particular case of mine relating to Depression, where SIS-II and SPM were used as Evaluation Tools during the course of the treatment. The case is that of a patient, who is an MBBS doctor and is employed as a Medical Officer of a State Dispensary in an India State. He has been diagnosed as Schizoaffective (DSM IV- 297.70; ICD 1o-f25) by the Psychiatrists of the PGIMER, Chandigarh and is being treated through drug therapy by the hospital and through Psychotherapy by the author. SIS-Ii and Standard Progressive Matrices were administered for evaluation at intervals. Lastly the patients left for Putaparti to stay at Satya Sai Baba’s ashram, were he was blessed by Sai Baba once. There he was attending Sai Baba’s satsangs (bhajans) and rendering social service in Baba’s hospital as a Medieval Doctor. This also has been taken into consideration as a method of therapy. Such a method of treatment has also been tried at many other places too and especially be a few doctors, headed by Br. Usha Sachdeva (1995) at the All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi. I am conscious of the fact that the data given above is too scanty to draw any conclusions but even then it is worthwhile to note the following trends, which are good pointers for further research on SIS: 1. An analysis of the contents of SIS II shows that it is a case of Depression. 2. Increase of typical responses is indicative of the fact that deviation from the normal has decreased. 3. Increase in total responses, human responses and movement responses show overall improvement of the patient. 4. Increase in percentile scores on SPM also points towards improvement. 5. Maximum improvement seems to have taken place during the patient’s stay Projective Technique & SIS 41

in Sai Baba’s asharm in Putaparti. This, to my mind is due to a strong faith of the patient’s family in Baba’s healing power and may also be due to some unknown spiritual factor, which needs to be further investigated specially with reference to saints and sages of other sects and religions also. ‘Many scholars have made reference to dramatic behavior changes consequent to religious experience. In India it is a common practice to use religious methods and spirituality for general well being, especially for physical and mental health problems (Rangaswamy, 1994). The following are the results of the analysis of SIS-II and SPM administered to the patient on different dates:- Contents 15-4-94 17-5-95 26-6-95 28-8-95 Human Figures Animal figures Anatomy Sex Others Typical Responses Atypical Responses Total responses Movement Responses 14-4-95 3-5-95 27-6-95 28-8-95 SPM scores in Percentiles Intutively I see a great future for SIS especially when lot of data has been collected on this test comparable to that on Rorschach. Then it is likely to replace Rorschach because of its additional advantage of ease in administration, scoring and interpretation. The use of gadgets like Video and Computer will go a lone way in making it popular amongst Clinical Psychologists, Psychiatrists and Research Workers. Shukla, T. R. (1987) introduced a set of 10 inkblot cards, prepared and developed by him at Central Institute of Psychiatry, Ranchi after long experimentation with normal and pathological population. All the cards are chromatic and there are both symmetrical and asymmetrical unstructured figures on the cards. The subjects are instructed to give 42 Dosajh

three responses (not must) on each card. First RT is noted and the position of the cards is also taken note of. The responses are recorded on record sheets and location chart. The variables include (i) RT (ii) Location (iii) Form Level (iv) Content. Thought some researchers have included many more variable (mostly similar to Holtzman Inkblot Test) but true pictures of these are yet to come. However, the efficacy of the test a projective psycho diagnostic instrument in discriminating Chronic Schizophrenics vs Normals, schizophrenics VS Normal, schizophrenics VS major Depression; schizophrenics VS Neurotic Depression, major Depression vs Neurotic Depression; Alcohol Dependents vs Normals, Maniocs vs Alcohol Dependents on at lest three or more variable “like (i) Number of Responses (ii) RT (iii)Location (iv) Form Level (v) Content and (vi) Pathological Responses” have been reported by Singh et al (1992, 194). The plea for preparing this new test by Shukla is to overcome some lacunae in Inkblot tests, like role of culture and language in the cognitive processes of individuals. Some have held the view that the form of a particulate language strongly influences the shape and form of perceptions (Lannennberg 1961; Brown & Lannenberg 1954; and Caroll & Cassgranda 1958). Moon & Cundick (1983) in cross-cultural studies of Rorschach found that Rorschach Test will yield some differences in perceptions as a result of cultural influences. Thus a minor modification or translation of a test is not the best solution. However, it has not been explained by Shukla so far how his new test overcomes these lacunae. Perhaps he will do it in the manual when it is published. Also the true picture about the efficiency, reliability and validity of this test will be clear only when the manual of the test will be available and Clinicians and Researchers will use the test in future. References: Brown & Lennenberg, E.H. (1954); A study of Language and cognition. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology; 44, 454-462. Cassell,W.A.(1980); ‘Manual Somatic Inkblot Series’. SIS Center, Anchorage, Alaska – 99508. Caroll & Cassgranda (1958); The function of Language classification in behavior. In E. Macomb (Ed). Readings in social psychology, New Yourk, Holt Rinehart & Winston. Dosajh, N.L. (1958); The Place of Projective Techniques in Guidance and Counseling; Ind. J. of Psy,; 205-207. Dosajh, N.L. (1983); Psychotherapy Including Yoga Therapy’, Kohli Publishers, 3 Industrial Area Phase II, Chandigarh – 160 002; 67. Dubey, B.L. et. al. (1994) diagnostic utility of SIS –II and Rorschach.SIS J. Proj. Psy & Ment Health, 1:1,19-26 Projective Technique & SIS 43

Holtzman,W.H. (1970) “Inkblot Perception and Personality’, University of Texas Press, Austin, p. 5-10. Klopfer, B. and Kelly (1946); The Rorschach Technique’; World Book Company, Yonkers-On- Hudson, New Yourk, p. 21. Lenenberg (1961); Colour Naming, Colour Recognition, Colour Discrimination. A Reappraisal. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 12, 375-382. Pershad, D. et. al. (1995); Diagnostic Significance of Content Analysis of SIS-II. SIS Journal of Projective and Mental Health, 2:2, 139-144. Rangaseamy, K. (1994); Spirituality and Psychotherapy’, Ind. J. of Clin. Psych., Vol. 21 No. 2, Editorial. Sachdeva, Usha et. al. (1995); ‘From AIIMS to Ashram’, The Tribune June 23, 1995; II. Shukla, T. R. (1977); Projective Technique in India. Ind J. Cl. Psychology, $:2,105-107 Shukla, T. R. (1987) Development of a New Inkblot Technique. Unpublished Report, Deptt. of Clinical Psychology, C.I.P., Kanka, Ranchi. Singh Amool R.; Ahmed, H.R.; Shkula, T.R. (1992); Efficacy of a New Inkblot Technique in differentiating Chronic Schizophrenia and Normal; Journal of Personality and Clinical Studies, Vol. 8, No. 1-2, 169-172. Singh, Amool R. et. al. (1993); Efficacy of a New Inkblot Technique in differentiating some Clinical & Normal Chronic Schizophrenia and Normal; Journal of Applied Psychology; Vol. 19, No. 1-2-77-80. Zubin, J. (1954); Failures of the Rorschach Technique, J. Proj. Tech., 18, 303-315. 44 Dosajh

Lt. Col Supraksh Chaudhary, M. D., Ph.D., Prof. Dept. of Psychiatry, RINPAS, Ranchi Capt. G.S. Sundari, D.P.N. Specialist Sister (Psychiatry), MH, Kirkee. Thiesens Pattern in Rorschach of Adolescents with Schizophrenia S. Chaudhury and G.S. Sundari Analysis of Thiesens Patterns in Rorschach response of 44 adolescent schizophrenics and an equal number of age and sex matched normal adolescents was undertaken. Only three of the five Thiesen’s patterns associated with schizophrenia, namely patterns A, C and D occurred significantly more frequently in the Rorschach records of adolescent schizophrenic as compared to the normal controls. The Rorschach test is the oldest and most widely used personality test in the clinical setting today, not only in adults but also in children. Rorschach’s communications concerning findings in children are rather sparse. The first to undertake a systemic investigation of children with the Rorschach test was Boom - Eschenburg who found that the test was eminently suitable for psychological assessment of children and adolescents (Bohm, 1958). Interpretation of children’s records has been dealt with notably in the work of Exert and Weiner (1982) who recommended the use of the Rorschach test for assessment of the personality of normal and schizophrenic children. Thiesen (1952) reported five patterns of Rorschach variable, which he found to be associated with schizophrenic patients and extremely rare in normal subjects. While these patterns significantly differentiated the two groups, it was stated that they must be regarded as tentative in as much as the groups on which they were tested were the same groups from which they were derived, and therefore needed to be confirmed on new groups. There is a paucity of studies in this field especially in children. The present study was undertaken to study the clinical utility of Thiesen’s pattern of Rorschach responses in schizophrenic and normal adolescents. Material and Method: Sample: The patient group consisted of forty four adolescent attending the out-patient department of MH Meerut and 151 Base Hospital during the period 01 Mar., 1990 to 30th Sep. 1994 and meeting DSM IIIR criteria for schizophrenia (APA, 1987). All patients were showing active symptoms of their disease and were on treatment with anti-psychotic drugs. None of them received ECT. Duration of illness varied from 6 months to over 3 year. Patients who were not cooperative for the Rorschach test were excluded from the study. Equal number of age and sex matched normal adolescents without past of family history of psychiatric disorder formed the normal control group and also took the Rorschach test.

46 Chaudhary & Sundari Tool: The Rorschach test was administered and scored by Beck’s method (Back et. al. 1961). Thiesen’s patterns were scored as follows:- Pattern A: The presence of 3 or more anatomy responses and 4 or more sex responses. Pattern B.: F+ % if less than 69 and Z score of less than 8.0. Pattern C: No C or M responses and an A % of less than 40. Pattern D: F% less than 69, A% Less than 40, and fewer than 5 popular responses. Pattern E: One or more DW responses and no FC responses. The patterns apply only to records where 10 or more responses have been given and statistical comparisons were made using the Chi square test with Yates correction (where applicable). Results: Mean age of the patients was 14.7 years (range 13-16 years) while mean age of the control group was 15.1 years (range 13-16 years). Socio-demographic characteristics of the patients and controls are given In Table I. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in the socio demographic variables. The results of analysis of the Rorschach response patterns of the subjects of the present study along with the results of Thiesen (1952) and Taulbee and Sission (1954) are presented in Table 2. In the present study, only three of the five patterns associated with schizophrenia, namely pattern A, C and D, suggested by Thiesen were confirmed. Discussion: Thiesen’ss patterns (1952) were first developed by examining a combination of twenty major Rorschach variables in schizophrenic adults and normal controls. Three criteria were used to select those patterns. The first criterion was that the pattern should occur in more than ten percent of the patient’s records. The second criterion was that the pattern be present in less than two percent of the control group. The third criterion was that the incidence of the pattern significantly differentiates the groups at the 0.01 level of significant. The presence of one or more patterns occurred in 48.3% of the schizophrenia patients and only 3.2% of the control subjects the presence of one more patterns in an individual’s protocol was considered diagnostic indicators of schizophrenia. The absence of any pattern, however, cannot be considered to indicate normality. Despite the initial promise of the system, which correctly labeled half of the

Rorschach in Schizophrenia 47 schizophrenics while misidentifying only a handful of normal, cross, validating efforts gave mixed results. Table 1 Socio-demographic Characteristics of Schizophrenia in patients (n=44) and Normal Subjects (n=44) Characteristic Schizophrenia Normal Chi Square P Patients Controls Value Age Distribution (in years) 12-13 14-15 0.2 <0.90 Sex Male 0.05 <0.80 Female Education 0-5 Class 6-10 Class 1.11 <0.50 11 Class Domicile Rural Urban 0.73 <0.30 Family Income Per Month < Rs. 2000 Rs. 2000-3000 0.61 <0.80 Rs. 3000-4000 Rs. 4000 Religion Hindu Muslim - 1.01 <0.70 Sikh Christian Rubin and Lonstein (1953) compared 42 hospitalized male schizophrenics with a

48 Chaudhary & Sundari Table 2 Patterns of Rorschach Variables with Schizophrenia Thisen 1952 Tauldee & Sison 1954 Present Study Pattern Patients Controls p Patients Controls P Patients Controls P (n=60) (n=157) (n=60) (n=157) (n=44) (n=44) A <0.001 <0.002 <0.02 B <0.001 NS <0.95 C <0.001 <0.02 <0.05 D <0.001 <0.04 <0.02 E <0.001 - <0.95

Rorschach in Schizophrenia 49 normal control group. Only pattern D differentiated between patients and controls. The presence of one/more patterns identified only 16.7% of the schizophrenics. An additional cross validation study (Taulbee and Sission, 1954), on the other hands, reported that patterns A,C & D did differentiate between schizophrenics and normals. Although they confirmed the infrequency of the patterns in normal subjects-only 4.5% of the normals showed, with only 27.4% of the schizophrenics demonstrating one or more of the Thiesen’s patterns. Khorana (1970) in a study of 20 schizophrenic children and matched normal controls reported that 4 of (Thiesen’s patterns (A,B,C, &D) were confirmed. However, in our study we found that only patterns A, C, and D occurred significantly more frequently in schizophrenic adolescents as compared to the age and sex matched normal subjects. In the present study also, the false positive rate was low (6.8%) but the true positive rate was not very high (52.3%). Conclusion: The findings of our study together with the findings of the earlier studies lead to the conclusion that Thiesen’s patterns are a set of score combinations that occur relatively infrequently in the Rorschach records of both normal as well as schizophrenic subjects. They are certainly more likely to appear in the records of schizophrenic than in normal groups. However, because of their infrequency they have limited clinical diagnostic utility. Reference: American Psychiatric Association (1987) Diagnostic and Statically Manual of Mental Disorders 3rd ed. Revised, (DSM-IIIR), Washington DC: APA –567. Beck, S.J. Beck, A.C., Levitt, E.E and Mollish, H.P;. (1961) Rorschach Test 3rd ed. New Yourk: Grune and Stratton, 1-10. Bohm, E.A. (1958) Textbook in Rorschach Test Diagnosis, New York: Grune and Stratton, 300- 12. Exner, J.E. & Weiner, I.B. (1982) The Nature and Interpretation of Rorschach. In : The Rorschach A comprehensive system, VOL. 3. Assessment of children and adolescents, New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1-6. Khorana, S. (1970) Pattern of Rorschach responses in Schizophrenic and Normal male children, Indian Journal of Psychiatry: 12: 185-9. Rubin H & Lonstein, M. (1953) Cross validation of suggested Rorschach patterns with schizophrenia, Journal of Consulting Psychology; 13-371-2. Taulee, E.. Sisson, B.D. (1954) Rorschach pattern analysis in schizophrenics – A cross validation study, journal; of Clinical Psychology, 10: 80-2. Thiesen, J.W. (1952) A pattern analysis of structural characteristics of the Rorschach test in Schizophrenia Journal of Consulting Psychology; 16: 365-70.

SIS J. Prok. & Ment. Health (1996) 3: 50-55 Amol R. Singh Ph.D., Consultant Clinical Psychology, Samvedna Clinical S-325, Greater Kailash- II New Delhi – 110048. K.S. Sengar, Consultant Clinical Psychologist, Personality Development Centre, Kanpur – 208 005. Habib Ahmed, Ph.D. Reader of Psychology, Zakir Husain College, New Delhi. K.R. Banerjee, Sr. Consultant Psychiatrist, Spring Meadows Hospital, New Delhi – 110 065. Dr. T. R. Shukla Ex. Prof of Clinical Psychology, Central Inst. of Psychiatry, Ranchi – 834 006. Efficacy of a New Inkblot Technique in Differentiating Manics, Alcohol, Dependents and Normal Amool R. Singh, K. S. Sengar, Habib Ahmed, K. R. Banerjee and T.R. Shukla In the present study, 10 new inkblot cards were administered on M.D.P.-M, Alcohol Dependent and Normal group’s of subjects. The final analysis revealed that all three groups under study were significantly different on most of the three major inkblot variables that were selected in the index study. The widespread use of inkblot techniques especially Rorschach, in clinical setting has been critically evaluated by various researchers and clinicians (Cronbach, 1949; Zubin et. al. 1965; Shukla, 1977 and Dubey, et. al. 1981). After assessing the current status of projective psycho diagnostic tests, need is felt that an objective, highly reliable, valid and psychometrically sound inkblot test should be developed so that the clinicians and research oinkers can use it comfortably without any doubt in their mind. The role of culture and language in the cognitive process of individuals has been a source of speculation. Some researchers (Lannenberg, 1961; Brown et. al. 1954 and Carroll and Casagrands, 1958) have had the view that the form of particular language strongly influences the shape and form of perceptions. Moon and Cundick (1983) in cross-cultural studies of Rorschach test found that Rorschach test yields some differences in perceptions as a result of cultural influences. Mere Minor modification or translation of a test is not the best solution; rather there is need for the development of the test, which are suited to our needs and socio-cultural milieu. Keeping these views in the mind, Shukla started working to develop this inkblot technique. Lot of work is still in progress. Effect of the tool in differentiating Chronic Schizophrenic, Major Depressive, Minor Depressive and Normal population has already been reported elsewhere (Singh, et. al. 1992, 1993). The present study is an attempt to assess the efficacy of this Psycho diagnostic tool as a projective instrument in differentiating the Alcohol Dependent, Main and Normal groups. The variable selected for the present study were divided into three categories i.e. location determinant and content.

51 New Inkblot Test Method: Sample: The sample consisted of 180 male subjects, which included 60 cases of Manic Depressive Psychoses- M, 60 cases of Alcohol Dependents and 60 Normal subjects. The patients were selected from Central Institute of Psychiatry, Ranchi and Vidya Sagar Hospital, New Delhi. The normal subjects did not have any history of psychiatric illness. Both the patient groups (MDP-M and Alcohol Dependent) were diagnosed by two psychiatrists as per I.C.D. –9 criteria. The socio demographic details of the sample are shoe in Table 1. Table 1 Socio-Demographic Pattern f the Sample Variable Normal MDP – M Alcohol Dependent N=60 n=60 n=60 Age 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 Marital Status Married Unmarried Divorce/Separated/ Widower Domicile Area Urban Sub-Urban Rural Qualifications Up to Primary Up to Matric Up to Graduation Post Graduation & Professionals Monthly Family Income (In Rs.) Up to 1000 1001-2000 2001- 3000 3001or Above

52 Singh et al Tools: Ten Inkblots, developed by Shkula, 1987) at Central Institute of Psychiatry, Ranchi, were used. All the cards are chromatic with symmetrical and asymmetrical figures on cards. This set of cards has been developed after long experimentation with normal as well as pathological populations. Singh and Sengar administered the test. Procedure: The subjects were instructed that they should given three responses on each card, which recorded on record sheets and location charts. In the present study, analysis of three major variables was done. Mean and Standard deviation of the variable ‘Location’, ‘Determinant’ and ‘Content’ categories for all three groups of subjects were calcite (Table-II). Further, critical Ratio (C.R.) value was calculated to determine the significance of differences in men and S.D. of responses under different categories of variable among M.D.O.0M, Alcohol Dependent and Normal groups Results and Discussion: The aim of this study was to find out the efficacy of this new inkblot technique in different the Manic, Alcohol Dependent and Normal group of subject. C.R. value was calculated I the basis of mean and S.D. value shone in Table – II. The C.R. value of group comparison are shown in Table-III, from which it is apparent that most of the three major categories of variable have yielded significant differences (p<0.05 to p<0.01) among the different comparisons of Manic, Alcohol Dependent and Normal groups. These findings establish that the new inkblot technique can be successfully employed for differential diagnosis of the patients. The index test has already been reported to be highly successful in differentiating different clinical group of patients and normal (Single, 1992, 1993). However, on few variables it is observed that no significant difference could befoul such a between Normal vs Manic group on number of ‘W’ and ‘C’ responses and Normal vs. Alcohol Dependent group on ‘S’ and ‘A’ responses and finally in Manic Vs Alcohol number of D., Dd, C and M responses and similarly in three of the content responses chosen for the study the result of the present study it can be said that this inkblot test can be a useful instrument especially for psycho diagnostic purposes in near future. However, some specific test variable have failed to distinguish particularly Alcohol Dependent vs Manic group which could be explained I terms of disease process and comparatively small sample size. Still, true picture regarding the psycho diagnostic efficacy as well as the therapeutic value of the test will only emerge when clinicians and researchers use the tool on different groups.

New Inkblot Test 53 Table 2 Mean and Standard Deviation of Responses in here Groups Inkblot Variables Normal M.D.P.-M. Alcohol Dependent (n=60) (n=60) (n=60) X SD X SD X SD Location W 5.90 2.60 6.20 4.94 3.95 2.96 D 8.80 7.09 15.45 4.79 15.85 5.20 Dd 1.10 2.02 033.70 2.34 3.50 3.19 S 1.20 0.50 2.20 1.20 1.50 1.20 Determinant F+ 10.50 6.21 17.55 4.80 15.55 4.97 C 4.55 2.58 5.05 3.84 5.50 2.87 M 0.65 1.30 1.25 1.87 1.35 1.93 Content H 3.10 2.13 4.50 3.12 6.70 3.89 A 4.85 4.53 6.45 3.53 5.80 2.55 An 1.15 2.13 2.35 2.29 2.50 1.85 Sex 1.45 2.54 0.35 0.81 0.70 1.26 Bt 2.85 1.84 4.25 3.20 0.10 0.45

54 Singh et al Table 3 C.R. Value of Group Comparison in Three Groups Comparisons Normal Normal Manic Variables Vs Vs Vs & C.R. Values Manic Alcohol Alcohol Dep. Location W 0.42 3.85** 3.03** D 6.04** 6.216** 0.38 Dd 6.52** 574** 0.39 S 6.49** 1.80 3.50* Determinant F+ 6.98** 7.98** 2.24* C 0.84 2.86** 0.73 M 2.06* 2.33 0.29 Content H 2.88** 6.28** 3.42** A 2.16* 1.41 1.16 An 3.00** 3.71** 0.40 Sex 3.10** 5.63** 1.84 Bt 2.94** 49.10** 10.00** * P <.05, ** < .01 References: Brown and Lennenberg, E. H.(1954); A Study of Language and Cognition, Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 44: 454-462. Carroll & Casagranda (1958); The function of Language Classification in Behaviour, In E. Macoby (Ed.) Readings in Social Psychology, New Yourk, Holt Rienhart & Winston. Cronbach, L. J. (1949); Statistical Methods Applied to Rorsch Scores, Psychological Bulletin, 46: 393-429.

New Inkblot Test 55 Dubey, B.L. Pershad, D. & Verma, S.K. (1981): An evaluation of Rorschach as a Clinical Tool Indian Journal of Clinical Psychology 8, 2, 157-163. Lennenberg (1961); Colour Naming, Colour Recognition, Colour Discrimination: A Reappraisal. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 12: 375-382. Moon, T.J. & Cundick, B.P. (1983) shifts and Potencies in Rorsch Responses as a Function of Culture and Language, Journal of Personality Assessment, 47, (4): 345-349. Shukla T.R. (1977); Psycho diagnostic Efficacy of Huntsman Inkblot Technique under Indian Conditions. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis. Shukla, T.R. (1977); projective Technique in India Indian Journal of Clinical Psychology, 4, 2: 105-107. Shukla, T.R. (1987); Development of New Inkblot Technique. Unpublished Report, Deptt. of Clinical Psychology, C.I.P., Kanke, Ranchi. Singh, Amool R.: Ahmed J. & Shukla T.R. (1992): Efficacy of a New India Technique in Differentiating Chronic Schizophrenics and Normal, Journal of Personality and Clinical Studies Vol. 8, No. 1-2: 169-172. Sing, Amool R.: Ahmed H., & Shukla T.R. (1993) Efficancy of a New Inkblot Technique in Differentiating some Clinical and NormalGroups, Journal of Indian Academy of Applied Psychology, Vol. 19, 19, No. 1-2: 77-80. Zubin, J. Eron, L.D. & Schumer F. (1965); An Experimental Approach to Projective Techniques. New Delhi, Wiley.

SIS JOURNAL OF PROJECTIVE PSYCHOLOGY AND MENTAL HEALTH is published twice a year (January & July) by the SOMATIC INKBLOT SOCIETY and is devoted to the advancement of research in the areas of projective psychology, personality assessment, psychotherapy and mental health. The journal is broadly concerned with the development of inkblot tests and personality assessment in clinical, counselling, cross cultural, organizational and health psychology settings. It aims to reach clinical psychologists, psychotherapists, psychiatrists, social workers, medical professionals and professional managers interested in the understanding and modification of human behaviour. The journal includes (a) research articles (b) book reviews (c) brief reports (d) news about conferences etc. and letters to the editor. MANUSCRIPTS PREPARATION : Manuscripts should be typewritten (double spaced throughout) submitted in duplicate to B.L. Dubey, Ph.D. Editor- in - Chief SIS Journal, P.O.Box 1107, Sector-15 Post Office, Chandigarh 160015 (India). E-mail : sisdubey@hotmail.com Manuscript can also be submitted to Wilfred A. Cassell. M.D., Editor, 4501E, 104th Avenue, Anchorage, AK-99516 (USA). The Editors reserve the right to refuse manuscript submitted and to make minor additions/deletions. Authors should prepare their manuscripts according to the Journal of Personality Assessment. SUBSCRIPTION : The journal is free to members of the Society, Annual membership fees are US $50 for foreign members and Rs. 250, for Indian members, Institutional subscriptions are US $100 for Foreign institutions and Rs. 500 for Indian institutions. Life membership is US $300 for foreign members and Rs. 1500 for Indian members. Non-members may subscribe for $30 or Rs. 150/- per issue. Cheques should be made payable to 'SOMATIC INKBLOT SOCIETY’ Chandigarh and should reach Dr. B.L. Dubey, Editor- in -Chief, (Address given above). Please add $5./Rs. 30 if you are sending subscription through cheque. CHANGE OF ADDRESS : Society / journal members should inform Mrs Padma Dwivedi, Secretary, SIS Center, Post Box 1107, Sector-15 Post Office, Chandigarh-160015 (India), Tel/Fax 91-172-710986, E-Mail: sisdubey@hotmail.com and Foreign Members should inform, Anand Dubey, Joint Editor, SIS Journal, Post Box 244045, Anchorage, AK-99524 (USA), E-Mail : adubey@hotmail.com of any change of mailing address. Copyright @ 1994. SOMATIC INKBLOT SOCIETY

Abstracted in “APA’s Psychological Abstract” Regd. No. 71632/99, RNI Delhi EDITORIAL CONSULTANTS SIS JOURNAL OF PROJECTIVE PSYCHOLOGY & MENTAL HEALTH (OFFICIAL JOURNAL OF SOMATIC INKBLOT SOCIETY) EDITOR-IN-CHIEF : Bankey L. Dubey, Ph.D., Director SIS Center, 4406 Forest Road, Anchorage, AK 99517 (USA) E-mail: sisdubey@rediffmail.com : Wilfred A. Cassell, MD, Director, SIS Center, 4501E, 104th Ave. Anchorage, AK 99516 (USA). E-Mail: siscassell@yahoo.com EDITORS : Amool Ranjan Singh, Ph.D. Prof. & Head, Dept. of Clinical Psychology, RINPAS,Kanke,Ranchi-834006. Tel.:91-651-2233687 E-mail:dr_amool_r_singh@rediffmail.com : S. Chaudhury, MD, Ph.D., Prof. Dept. of Psychiatry, RINPAS, Kanke,Ranchi-834006.Mob.:91-9371019351 E-mail : suprakashch@hotmail.com : Prakash Chandran,Ph.D. Dhanya Nursing Home, Palarivattom, Edappally P.O. Kochin-682024 (India) Mob.: 91-9847039971 Email: prakasharackal@rediffmail.com : Anand Dubey,B.E., MBA, SIS Center, 4406 Forest Road, Anchorage, AK 99517 (USA) E-Mail: anand.dubey@gmail.com : Padma Dwivedi, M.A., 1671, Sector 49-B, Pushpak Society, Chandigarh 160 047 (India) : L. Sam Manickam, Ph.D. Prof. Dept. of Cl.Psy., SRMC and RI, Porur, Chennai-600116 (India) Tel: 91-044-24765512, Cell:91-9447009032 E-mail : sammanickam@sify.com : Rakesh Pandey, Ph.D. Reader, Dept. of Psy., M.G.Kashi Vidya Peeth, Varanasi-221001. Tel.: 91-542-2318246 E-mail : rpan_in@yahoo.com : Tamera Randolph, PO Box 244045, Anchorage, AK 99524 (USA) E-mail: tamerarandolph@hotmail.com John Baby, Ph.D., India Philip W. Baker, Ed.D., U.S.A. Mahesh Bhargava, Ph.D., India T.K. Chakraborty, M.D., India Carina Coulacoglou, Ph.D., Greece Philip Greenway, Ph.D, Australia K.V. Kaliappan, Ph.D., India Arvind Keshary, Ph.D, India Anatoly B. Khromov, Russia R. Kumar, Ph.D. India Sudhir Kumar, M.D. India Lisa Milne, Ph.D., Australia David Miller, Ph.D., U.S.A. Mridula Mishra, Ph.D., India Nalini Mishra, Ph.D., India Paola Nicolini, M.A., Italy Paul E. Panek, Ph.D., U.S.A. Edward M. Petrosky, Ph.D., U.S.A. Marisa Porecca, Ph.D., Italy C.S. Rao, Ph.D., India Stefano Reschini, M.A, Italy Barry A. Ritzler, Ph.D., U.S.A. D. Saldanha, M.D., India Archana Singh, M.A., India M.P. Singh, Ph.D., India R.N. Singh, Ph.D., India Umed Singh, Ph.D.India David Sperbeck, Ph.D., U.S.A. Ajay K.Srivastava, Ph.D., India Ramjee Srivastava, Ph.D., India Ailo Uhinki, Ps.D., Finland Yasho V. Verma, Ph.D., India