Rorschach’s Idea of a “Movement” Response in the Light of Recent Philosophy and Psychology of Perception

H. Malmgren

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1027/1192-5604.24.1.1

Abstract:The proper definition of the kinesthetic or movement (M) category has been the subject of many controversies within the Rorschach community; see, for example, the discussion between Kramer and Exner (Kramer, 1991; Exner, 1991). The present paper elucidates the nature of movement responses by means of a theoretical analysis of some of the key concepts involved. This analysis in part is of a philosophical character, but I also bring in several recent results from the psychology and neurophysiology of perception which in my opinion are crucial to a correct understanding of the movement responses. The first two parts of the essay describe the basic controversy between those Rorschach theorists who – like Hermann Rorschach himself and Ewald Bohm – hold that kinesthetic identification is a necessary ingredient in any movement response, and those – like John Exner – who want to drop this condition from the definition. This controversy is shown to involve another fundamental issue, namely: In what sense is movement a determinant, and what should be meant by a determinant? The third section also discusses a main objection against keeping Rorschach’s original definition: its reliance on introspective criteria. The fourth part takes a historical perspective, describing the philosophical and psychological tradition called associationism, discussing certain ideas concerning kinesthetic sensibility brought forward within that tradition, and finally analyzing the nature and extent of Hermann Rorschach’s commitment to associationism, especially as manifested in his doctoral dissertation. Some main elements of the 20th-century psychological and philosophical critique of associationism are outlined in Sections 5–6, and the relevance of this critique for the definition of a movement response is explained. Converging evidence from different sources, such as child psychology and clinical and primate neuropsychology, is then brought together in Section 7 to show that recent work on perception supports Hermann Rorschach’s basic intuition about the M category. In Section 8, a new definition of movement responses is given in terms of practical perception and immediate visuo-motor couplings. Finally, in Section 9, the possible use of Rorschach data in the experimental analysis of motion-from-form perception is pointed out.