Comment

I enjoyed reading Miss Palmiere's study, although not without some reservations. I enjoyed especially the way the items of the index offering forced-choice responses were designed; this seemed to reveal a clear grasp and refined understanding of introverted and extraverted attitudes, as well as of the application of the anima and animus concept. I also appreciated the careful approach employed in design and interpretation of the experiment. For instance, I liked the use of a variety of adjectives in the check blanks of which Miss Palmiere herself feels critical on account of the failure of some subjects to use them; these adjectives were introduced in order to counteract a bias on the part of the subject to respond in an established way.

For readers who are not familiar with the TAT (Murray's Thematic Apperception Test), it has to be stated that the forced-choice questions, as well as the instructions to give the story in writing, have been designed by Miss Palmiere for research purposes. In a clinical setting, the subject is asked to tell the story. Murray's instructions (1943) to make up a story are similar to those given by Miss Palmiere, including the formulation, ‘This is a test of imagination.’ I have pointed out elsewhere (Strauss, 1958) that I do not present the TAT as a test of imagination in order to prevent the subject from feeling blocked when he is told that his imagination is being tested.

The method of forced-choice is not infrequently used for research purposes in order to obtain data which can be treated statistically. No basic objections can be raised against the findings produced by this method. However, an unavoidable over-simplification in technique is bound to lead to an impoverishment in the range and quality of responses concerned with phantasy; thus, despite the variety of adjectives used, the subject has to keep the ‘plot line of the story’ within the choices offered to him. Since all subjects were under the same restrictions and especially s