There are two sections in the graphic, one about test administration, and one about test interpretation. Text under the title “Examining the Unconscious: Projective Personality Tests” reads “The psychoanalytic perspective holds that some aspects of personality exist beneath conscious awareness. Projective personality tests seek to uncover these characteristics. Ideas and anxieties in the unconscious will appear in descriptions of ambiguous stimuli, revealing previously hidden conflicts that the test administrator can evaluate.” The test administration section is underneath this text, and includes the following text: “The best-known projective tests, the Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) and the Rorschach Inkblot Test, are both conducted in the same way (Lilienfeld, Wood, & Garb, 2005): The test administrator presents a series of picture cards, one at a time, then records the participant’s responses. The administrator also notes behaviors such as gestures, tone of voice, and facial expressions.” There are two photographs in this section, one showing a selection of cards, and the other showing cards in a Roarschach test. Text under the first photograph reads “The standard administration of the TAT presents a selection of 5 to 12 cards. The participant is asked to tell a story for each scene, including what the characters are feeling and how the story might end.” Text under the second photograph reads “The Rorschach has 10 cards with symmetrical inkblots, 5 in color and 5 in black-and-white. The participant is prompted toggle multiple responses for each image, identifying details.” The test interpretation section is underneath the test administration, and shows a Roarschach card, responses to the card, and the examiner’s analysis of each response. Text under the title reads “To help decrease the influence of administrator bias in interpretation of projective tests, comprehensive systems have been developed to standardize scoring and interpretation of some tests. For the Rorschach Inkblot Test, responses are coded on dimensions such as location (whole inkblot or one detail), themes (unique or consistent), and thought processes (Erdberg, 1990). The use of a comprehensive system allows administrators to compare typical and atypical responses.” The responses and analyses are as follows. Response 1: “Looks like two people.” Analysis: “Participant mentions the typical response of two figures.” Response 2: “The people are fighting over something.” Analysis: “Suggestion that the people are fighting could indicate issues with aggression or an aggressive personality.” Response 3: “Or they’re carrying something heavy together.” Analysis: “Focus on individuals working together could represent a need for social connection.” Response 4: “Maybe it’s one person looking through a mirror.” Analysis: “However, seeing one person alone could indicate social anxiety.” Response 5: “I also see a butterfly.” Analysis: “Now participant switches to a specific part of the image, which could also show that he is uncomfortable thinking about others, perhaps related to introversion.” Text under the section reads “These sample responses are representative for this inkblot. Most participants interpret this Rorschach inkblot as two figures (Burstein and Loucks, 1989).”