Advancing Scientific Discourse in the Controversy Surrounding the Comprehensive System for the Rorschach: A Rejoinder to Meyer (2000)

Authors

James M. Wood, University of Texas at El Paso
M. Teresa Nezworski, University of Texas at Dallas
William J. Stejskal, University of Virginia
Sena Garven, University of Nebraska–Lincoln

Document Type

Article

Date of this Version

June 2001

Comments

Published in JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY ASSESSMENT, 76(3), 369–378. Copyright © 2001, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Used by permission.

Abstract

A recent commentary by Meyer (2000) in the Journal of Personality Assessment alleged that Rorschach critic Wood and his colleagues had intentionally published information that they knew to be in error. To substantiate this contention, Meyer’s commentary published information that was part of the peer review process at another journal. In this rejoinder, we present factual information that shows we have consistently acted in good faith. This rejoinder suggests that the scientific debate regarding the Comprehensive System for the Rorschach is unlikely to be advanced by speculating about the intentions of Rorschach critics, or by publishing information from the peer review process that is usually kept confidential.