SavedAdd your journal

Journals / AYNA Klinik Psikoloji Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 13 Sayı: 1

Inter-Rater Reliability of the Social Cognition and Object Relations Scale-Global Rating Method (SCORS-G) of Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) Narratives

Tematik Algı Testi (TAT) Öykülerinin Sosyal Biliş ve Nesne İlişkileri Ölçeği-Global Derecelendirme Yöntemi’nin (SBNİÖ-G) Puanlayıcılar Arası Güvenirliği

Nesrin Kara0009-0008-3510-2070
Cennet Şafak Öztürk(Aydın Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi İnsan ve Toplum Bilimleri Fakültesi Psikoloji Bölümü)0000-0002-8485-039X
Çiğdem Dereboy0000-0001-9105-1513
Pages
197–219
Publication Date
2026-01-31
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The results indicated that the internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.85) of the SCORS-G was good, and the inter-rater reliability was acceptable to excellent.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study aims to determine the inter-rater reliability of the Social Cognition and Object Relations Scale-Global Rating Method (SCORS-G) of Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) narratives.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The study was performed with 95 people (72 women, 23 men) in the clinical sample.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The results indicated that the internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.85) of the SCORS-G was good, and the inter-rater reliability was acceptable to excellent.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:sosyal biliş · nesne ilişkileri · tematik algı testi

Abstract

This study aims to determine the inter-rater reliability of the Social Cognition and Object Relations Scale-Global Rating Method (SCORS-G) of Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) narratives. The study was performed with 95 people (72 women, 23 men) in the clinical sample. The mean age of women was 30.97 (SD = 10.73), and the mean age of men was 31.04 (SD = 11.74). Sociodemographic Information Form, TAT, and SCORS-G Rating Method were used in the study. The scoring of the TAT narratives was performed by 2 raters according to the SCORS-G Rating Method. The results indicated that the internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.85) of the SCORS-G was good, and the inter-rater reliability was acceptable to excellent. The Emotional Investment in Relationships (EIR) showed a medium level of significant relationship with the Complexity of Representations of People (COM) and a high level of significant relationship with the Affective Quality of Representations (AFF). It was determined that EmotionalInvestment in Values and Moral Standards (EIM) had a moderately positive and significant relationship with AFF and EIR. Understanding of Social Causality had a high positive relationship with COM and EIR; Experience and Management of Aggressive Impulses had a high positive relationship with AFF and EIM; and a weak but positively significant relationship with EIR. Consequently, it may be stated that SCORS-G is reliable and has good internal consistency.

Özet

Araştırmanın amacı Tematik Algı Testi (TAT) öykülerinin Sosyal Biliş ve Nesne İlişkileri Ölçeği-Global Derecelendirme Yöntemi’nin (SBNİÖ-G) puanlayıcılar arası güvenirliğini saptamaktır. Araştırma, klinik örneklemde 95 kişiyle (72 kadın, 23 erkek) yapılmıştır. Kadınların yaş ortalaması 30,97 (SS = 10,73) ve erkeklerin yaş ortalaması 31,04 (SS = 11,74)’tür. Araştırmada Sosyodemografik Bilgi Formu, TAT, SBNİÖ-G Derecelendirme Yöntemi kullanılmıştır. TAT öykülerinin puanlaması SBNİÖ-G Derecelendirme Yöntemine göre 2 değerlendirici tarafından yapılmıştır. Bulgular SBNİÖ-G’in iç tutarlılığı (Cronbach alfa = 0,85)’nın iyi, puanlayıcılar arası güvenirliğinin kabul edilir ile mükemmel arasında olduğuna işaret etmiştir. İlişkilere Duygusal Yatırım (İDY)’nin İnsan Temsillerinin Karmaşıklığı (İTK) ile orta; Temsillerin Duygu Kalitesi (TDK) ile yüksek düzeyde anlamlı ilişki gösterdiği gözlenmiştir. Değerlere ve Ahlaki Standartlara Duygusal Yatırım (DASDY)’nin TDK ve İDY ile orta düzeyde pozitif yönde anlamlı ilişkisi olduğu saptanmıştır. Sosyal Nedenselliği Anlama’nın İTK ve İDY ile pozitif yönde yüksek; Saldırgan Dürtülerin Deneyimlenmesi ve Yönetilmesi’nin TDK ve DASDY ile pozitif yönde yüksek ve İDY ile zayıf ancak pozitif yönde anlamlı ilişkisi gözlenmiştir. Sonuç olarak SBNİÖ-G’in güvenilir ve iyi iç tutarlılığa sahip olduğu söylenebilir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Kara, N., Öztürk, C. Ş., Dereboy, Ç. (2026). Inter-Rater Reliability of the Social Cognition and Object Relations Scale-Global Rating Method (SCORS-G) of Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) Narratives. AYNA Klinik Psikoloji Dergisi, Cilt: 13 Sayı: 1, 197–219. https://doi.org/10.31682/ayna.1519507

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (44)

  1. Ackerman, S. J., Clemence, A. J., Weatherill, R. ve Hilsenroth, M. J. (1999). Use of the TAT in the assessment of DSM-IV cluster B personality disorders. Journal of Personality Assessment, 73(3), 422-448. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327752JPA7303_9
  2. Bellak, L. (1993). The T.A.T., C.A.T. and S.A.T. in clinical use. (5. Basım). Allyn and Bacon, Massachusetts.
  3. Bornstein, R. F. (2002). A process dissociation approach to objective-projective test score interrelationships. Journal of Personality Assessment, 78(1), 47-68. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327752JPA7801_04
  4. Bouvet, C., Prime, C., Camart, N., Fouques, D. ve Zebdi, R. (2020). Discriminant validity (clinical vs non clinical) of the French Version of the Social Cognition and Object Relations Scale, French Version, for TAT narratives. Revue Québécoise de Psychologie, 41(1), 45-60. https://doi.org/10.7202/1070662ar
  5. Bram, A. D. (2014). Object relations, interpersonal functioning, and health in a nonclinical sample: Construct validation and norms for the TAT SCORS-G. Psychoanalytic Psychology, 31, 314-342. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036286
  6. Burger, J. M. (2016). Kişilik: Psikoloji biliminin insan doğasına dair söyledikleri. (İ. D. Erguvan Sarıoğlu, Çev.). Kaknüs Yayınları. (2004)
  7. Butcher, J. N. (Ed.). (2009). Oxford handbook of personality assessment (1. Basım). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195366877.001.0001
  8. Cohen J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155-159. https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-2909.112.1.155
  9. Cohen, R. J., Swerdlik, M. E. ve Phillips, S. M. (1996). Psychological testing and assessment: An introduction to test and measurements (3. Basım). Mayfield.
  10. Cramer, P. (1991). The development of defense mechanisms: Theory, research, and assessment (1. Basım). Springer-Verlag Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-9025-1
  11. Cramer, P. (1999). Future directions for the Thematic Apperception Test. Journal of Personality Assessment, 72(1), 74-92. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa7201_5
  12. Eudell-Simmons, E. M., Stein, M. B., DeFife, J. A. ve Hilsenroth, M. J. (2005). Reliability and validity of the Social Cognition and Object Relations Scale (SCORS) in the assessment of dream narratives. Journal of Personality Assessment, 85(3), 325-333. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa8503_09
  13. Garcia, D. J., Crittenden, E. B., Skadberg, R. M., Finn, M. T. M., Schmidt, M., Kurdziel-Adams, G. ve Waugh, M. H. (2021). Social Cognition and Object Relations Scale as level of personality functioning. Psychoanalytic Psychology, 38(3), 185-193. https://doi.org/10.1037/pap0000369
  14. Hibbard, S., Hilsenroth, M. J., Hibbard, J. K. ve Nash, M. R. (1995). A validity study of two projective object representations measures. Psychological Assessment, 7(4), 432-439. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.7.4.432
  15. Hibbard, S., Mitchell, D. ve Porcerelli, J. (2001). Internal consistency of the Object Relations and Social Cognition scales for the Thematic Apperception Test. Journal of Personality Assessment, 77(3), 408-419. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327752JPA7703_03
  16. Hilsenroth, M. J. ve Segal, D. L. (Edl.). (2004). Comprehensive handbook of psychological assessment, Volume 2: Personality assessment. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
  17. Hilsenroth, M., Stein, M. ve Pinsker, J. (2007). Social Cognition and Object Relations Scale: global rating method (SCORS-G, 2. Basım.). [Unpublished manuscript]. The Derner Institute of Advanced Psychological Studies, Adelphi University, Garden City, NY.
  18. IBM Corp. (2015). IBM SPSS statistics for Windows (Version 23.0). Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.
  19. Inslegers, R., Vanheule, S., Meganck, R., Debaere, V., Trenson, E., Desmet, M. ve Roelstraete, B. (2012). The assessment of the social cognition and object relations scale on TAT and interview data. Journal of Personality Assessment, 94(4), 372-379. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2012.662187
  20. İkiz,T. (2012). Tematik Algı Testi (TAT) psikanalitik yönelimli el kitabı (1. Basım). Bağlam Yayıncılık.
  21. Koo, T. K. ve Li, M. Y. (2016). A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. Journal of Chiropractic Medicine, 15(2), 155-163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012
  22. Lee, J., Lim, J. ve Chang, M. (2018). Validating the Korean Version of the Social Cognition and Object Relations Scale using the Thematic Apperception Test. Korean Journal of Clinical Psychology, 37(4), 540-557. https://doi.org/10.15842/kjcp.2018.37.4.007
  23. McClelland, D. C., Atkinson, J. W., Clark, R. A. ve Lowell, E. L. (1953). The achievement motive. Appleton-Century-Crofts. https://doi.org/10.1037/11144-000
  24. Millon, T., Grossman, S., Millon, C., Meagher, S. ve Ramnath, R. (2004). Personality disorders in modern life (2. Basım). New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons
  25. Murray, H. (1943). Thematic Apperception Test manuel. Harvard University, 1-21.
  26. Peters, E. J., Hilsenroth, M. J., Eudell-Simmons, E. M., Blagys, M. D. ve Handler, L. (2006). Reliability and validity of the Social Cognition and Object Relations Scale in clinical use. Psychotherapy Research, 16(5), 617-626. https://doi.org/10.1080/10503300600591288
  27. Shrout, P. E. ve Fleiss, J. L. (1979). Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin, 86(2), 420-428. https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-2909.86.2.420
  28. Siefert, C. J., Stein, M. B., Slavin-Mulford, J., Sinclair, S. J., Haggerty, G. ve Blais, M. A. (2016). Estimating the effects of Thematic Apperception Test card content on SCORS-G ratings: Replication with a nonclinical sample. Journal of Personality Assessment, 98(6), 598-607. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2016.1167696
  29. Siefert, C. J., Stein, M., Slavin-Mulford, J., Haggerty, G., Sinclair, S. J., Funke, D. ve Blais, M. A. (2018). Exploring the factor structure of the social cognition and object relations-global rating method: Support for two- and three factor models. Journal of Personality Assessment, 100(2), 122-134. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2017.1336716
  30. Stein, M. B. ve Siefert, C. J. (2018). Introduction to the special section on the social cognition and object relations scale-global rating method: From research to practice. Journal of Personality Assessment, 100(2), 117-121. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2017.1418749
  31. Stein, M. B., Pinsker-Aspen, J. H. ve Hilsenroth, M. J. (2007). Borderline pathology and the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI): An evaluation of criterion and concurrent validity. Journal of Personality Assessment, 88(1), 81-89. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223890709336838
  32. Stein, M. B., Slavin-Mulford, J., Siefert, C. J., Sinclair, S. J., Renna, M., Malone, J., Bello, I. ve Blais, M. A. (2014). SCORS-G stimulus characteristics of select Thematic Apperception Test cards. Journal of Personality Assessment, 96(3), 339-349. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2013.823440
  33. Stein, M. B., Slavin-Mulford, J., Siefert, C. J., Sinclair, S. J., Smith, M., Chung, W.-J., Liebman, R. ve Blais, M. A. (2015). External validity of SCORS-G ratings of Thematic Apperception Test narratives in a sample of outpatients and inpatients. Rorschachiana, 36(1), 58-81. https://doi.org/10.1027/1192-5604/a000057
  34. Stein, M. B., Slavin-Mulford, J., Sinclair, S. J., Chung, W. J., Roche, M., Denckla, C. ve Blais, M. A. (2018). Extending the use of the SCORS-G composite ratings in assessing level of personality organization. Journal of personality assessment, 100(2), 166-175. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2016.1195394
  35. Stein, M. B., Slavin-Mulford, J., Sinclair, S. J., Siefert, C. J. ve Blais, M. A. (2012). Exploring the construct validity of the social cognition and object relations scale in a clinical sample. Journal of Personality Assessment, 94(5), 533-540. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2012.668594
  36. Stein, M. ve Slavin-Mulford, J. (2018). The Social Cognition and Object Relations Scale-Global Rating Method (SCORS-G): A comprehensive guide for clinicians and researchers (1. Basım).Routledge
  37. Stein, M., Hilsenroth, M., Slavin-Mulford, J. ve Pinsker, J. (2011). Social Cognition and Object Relations Scale: Global rating method. [Unpublished manuscript]. Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.
  38. Sundberg, N. D., Winebarger, A. A. ve Taplin, J. R. (2002). Clinical psychology: Evolving theory, practice, and research (4. Basım). Upper Saddle River, NJ, US: Prentice Hall/Pearson Education, Inc.
  39. Tomkins, S. S. ve Tomkins, E. J. (Collaborator). (1965). The Thematic Apperception Test: The theory and technique of interpretation (8. Basım). New York: Grune & Stratton.
  40. Westen, D. (1995). Social Cognition and Object Relations Scale: Q-Sort for projective stories (SCORS–Q).[Unpublished manuscript]. Department of Psychiatry, The Cambridge Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Cambridge, MA.
  41. Westen, D., Barends, A., Leigh, M., Mendel, M. ve Silbert, D. (1990c). Social cognition and object relations scale (SCORS): Manual for coding interview data. [Unpublished manuscript]. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
  42. Westen, D., Lohr, N., Silk, K. R., Gold, L. ve Kerber, K. (1990b). Object relations and social cognition in borderlines, major depressives, and normals: A Thematic Apperception Test analysis. Psychological Assessment: A Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 2(4), 355-364. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.2.4.355
  43. Westen, D., Silk, K., Lohr, N. ve Kerber, K. (1990a). Object relations and social cognition: TAT scoring manual. [Unpublished manual]. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
  44. Zou, G. Y. (2012). Sample size formulas for estimating intraclass correlation coefficients with precision and assurance. Statistics in Medicine, 31(29), 3972-3981. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.5466