Citation

Katko NJ, Meyer GJ, Mihura JL, Bombel G. J. Pers. Assess. 2009; 91(4): 357-364.

Affiliation

Department of Psychology, University of Toledo, Toledo, Ohio 43606-3390, USA. nkatko@UTNet.UToledo.Edu

Copyright

(Copyright © 2009, Society for Personality Assessment, Publisher Informa - Taylor and Francis Group)

DOI

10.1080/00223890902936116

PMID

20017065

Abstract

We provide a meta-analytic review of interrater reliability for scoring the 2 most commonly studied Rorschach (2003) aggression measures: (a) The Elizur (1949) Hostility Scale and its main derivative scoring systems (Holtzman, Thorpe, Swartz, & Herron, 1961; Murstein, 1956) and (b) Holt's (1977, 2005) aggression variables. Substantial reliability was observed for both Elizur's hostility score (e.g., weighted mean summary score correlation = .91, N = 1,279) and Holt's aggression variables (e.g., weighted mean summary score correlation = .84, N = 226). These meta-analytic data suggest that like the contemporary variables included in Exner's Comprehensive System or Gacono and Meloy's (1994) extended aggression scores, the historically important Elizur scoring systems and Holt aggression variables can be scored reliably. Supplementary materials are available for this article. Go to the publisher's online edition of the Journal of Personality Assessment for the following free supplemental resources: a document of results examining publication source, scoring system, amount of rater training, and severity of aggressive pathology in the sample as potential moderators of reliability.

Language: en