LORANDOS: Doctor, you used the Rorschach technique in this case, correct?
Witness: Correct.
LORANDOS: And Hermann Rorschach developed the first Rorschach technique in the 1920s, correct?
Witness: Correct.
LORANDOS: And the ink blot cards Hermann Rorschach developed are the very same cards you used in this case, correct?
Witness: Correct.
LORANDOS: And Hermann Rorschach developed his own system of scoring and interpreting the Rorschach technique, correct?
Witness: Also correct, yes.
LORANDOS: But you did not rely on Hermann Rorschach's original scoring and interpretive system in this case, correct?
Witness: Oh no, no.
LORANDOS: And Beck developed his system for scoring and interpreting the Rorschach in 1937, correct?
Witness: Yes, I know that Beck has developed a system; I didn't quite know it was 1937.
LORANDOS: And so psychologists still use portions of Beck's scoring and interpretive system today, correct?
Witness: That may be the case.
LORANDOS: And Hertz developed his system for scoring and interpreting the Rorschach technique in 1938, correct?
Witness: I know Hertz has developed his system, yes.
LORANDOS: And some psychologists still use portions of Hertz's scoring and interpretive system today, correct?
Witness: Again, that might be the case.
LORANDOS: And Klopfer and Kelley developed their system for scoring and interpreting the Rorschach technique in 1942, correct?
Witness: Correct.
LORANDOS: Same cards, correct?
Witness: Yes, yes.
LORANDOS: And some psychologists still use portions of Klopfer and Kelley's scoring and interpretive system today, correct?
Witness: I don't know if that's necessarily true. It might be the case.
LORANDOS: And Perkowski developed his system for scoring and interpretation of the Rorschach in 1947, correct?
Witness: I didn't know the exact year, but yes, Perkowski has his system, yes.
LORANDOS: And some psychologists still use portions of Perkowski's scoring and interpretive system today, correct?
Witness: I'm not sure; that could be the case.
LORANDOS: And Rapaport developed his system for scoring and interpreting the Rorschach in 1956, correct?
Witness: I know it's sometime in the '50s, yes.
LORANDOS: And some psychologists still use portions of Rapaport's scoring and interpretive system today, correct?
Witness: Again, I don't know for sure one way or the other; that could be the case.
LORANDOS: Okay. And between 1920 and 1956 there were at least six different scoring and interpretive systems developed for the very same Rorschach cards, correct?
Witness: Correct.
LORANDOS: So between 1920 and 1956 there was no single scoring and interpretive system for the Rorschach that was generally accepted, correct?
Witness: That is correct, yes.
LORANDOS: Now, Exner's 1974 system has gained general recognition for scoring and interpreting the Rorschach, correct?
Witness: Again correct, yes.
LORANDOS: And many psychologists will combine portions of Exner's system with those of Beck, Hertz, Klopfer, Kelley, Perkowski, or Rapaport, correct?
Witness: I don't know if that is the case.
LORANDOS: Might depend on which graduate school they went to, correct?
Witness: Repeat your question.
LORANDOS: Might depend on which graduate school they went to, correct?
Witness: It might depend on what graduate school the psychologist attended, yes.
LORANDOS: Okay. And these idiosyncratic ways of combining Exner's system with other systems continue to indicate that there's no generally accepted method for administering, scoring, and interpreting the Rorschach, correct?
Witness: Well no, the generally recognized and accepted method for administration and interpretation is Exner's comprehensive system.
LORANDOS: Now my question. And these idiosyncratic ways of combining Exner's system with the other systems continues to indicate that there's no generally accepted method for administering, scoring, and interpreting the Rorschach, correct?
Witness: No, I would not agree.
LORANDOS: How about this. The review of Oscar Buros and the Buros Institute originally published as The Mental Measurements Yearbooks, and Tests and Print, are generally recognized and accepted as authoritative texts regarding psychological testing, correct?
Witness: Yes.
LORANDOS: Please consider the following comments from the 1999 issue of Tests and Print Volume 5 regarding the Rorschach, and I'll read, "Many variations in scoring and interpretation are in use with no method generally accepted." Now my question; if there are many variations in scoring and interpretation available for the Rorschach, then a psychologist other than you could have administered and scored the Rorschach differently than you, correct?
Witness: Well if that is the case, yes but I...
LORANDOS: Thank you. And if another psychologist scored and administered the Rorschach differently from you, that psychologist could also have interpreted the Rorschach responses differently from you, correct?
Witness: Correct, if that's the case.
LORANDOS: And Rorschach responses can be influenced by who administers the Rorschach ink blots, correct?
Witness: Yes.
LORANDOS: And The Journal of Personality Assessment is a generally recognized and accepted peer review journal in your field, correct?
Witness: Yes.
LORANDOS: And a 1998 article by Lerner published in The Journal of Personality Assessment titled, Schachtel and Experiential Rorschach Assessment might be relevant to your opinions in this case, correct?
Witness: It might be.
LORANDOS: Now, in his 1998 article, Lerner wrote, and I'll read, "To understand a Rorschach record, it is essential to be aware of its interpersonal aspects and implications. This means primarily that we must never forget that the Rorschach performance and the experience of the testee in the Rorschach situation are an interpersonal performance and interpersonal experiences." Now my question; in understanding a Rorschach record, it is essential to be aware of its interpersonal aspects and implications. That means anyone's Rorschach responses can be influenced by examiner or examinee influences, correct?
Witness: That could happen, yes.
LORANDOS: In other words, a Rorschach assessment amounts to a situation where examinee and examiner both influence and are influenced by each other, correct?
Witness: Yes.
LORANDOS: Therefore the Rorschach responses of any examinee can be different if reacting to any examiner, correct?
Witness: Well in theory.
LORANDOS: Thank you. Consequently, another psychologist could have interpreted the Rorschach in this case differently than you as a result of obtaining different responses, correct?
Witness: Again, in theory that could be.
LORANDOS: And you have not published anything in a peer review journal necessitating that we reconsider Lerner's position in this regard, correct?
Witness: No.
LORANDOS: And as you sit here today you cannot cite anything published in a peer review journal necessitating that we reconsider Lerner's position, correct?
Witness: No, no I cannot.
