Comparison of TAT and Free Speech Techniques for Eliciting Source Material in Computerized Content Analysis

We compared the free speech samples and Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) responses of 95 community-residing volunteers by using the General Inquirer content analysis computer program and the Harvard III Psychosociological Dictionary (Stone, Dunphy, Smith, & Ogitvie, 1966). Comparability was assessed by computing mean differences and correlations among techniques. The techniques were evaluated by assessing the ability of data derived from each to predict individual differences in developmental level, gender, depressive symptomatology, and personality. Results show highly discriminable profiles and low reliability among techniques. TAT data were superior in predicting individual, differences. We suggest that structured techniques like the TAT are preferable to standard free speech instructions for eliciting data in content analytic studies and discuss the possibility of computerized content analysis as a method of scoring the TAT.