Editing Thematic Apperception Test (section)

===Validity===
The validity of the TAT, or the degree to which it measures what it is supposed to measure,<ref name="validity definition">{{Cite web|url=http://allpsych.com/stats/unit2/32-2/#.VTQOSWRVikp|title=32: Validity: Measuring What We Intend to Measure – AllPsych|access-date=2015-04-19|archive-date=2015-04-27|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150427111537/http://allpsych.com/stats/unit2/32-2/#.VTQOSWRVikp|url-status=live}}</ref> is low.<ref name="lilienfeld" /> Jenkins <ref name="jenkins">Jenkins, S. R. (2008). Introduction: Why "score" TATs, anyway?. In S. R. Jenkins & (Eds.), A handbook of clinical scoring systems for the Thematic Apperception Test. New York, NY: Taylor and Francis Group.</ref> has stated that "the phrase 'validity of the TAT' is meaningless, because validity is specific not to the pictures, but to the set of scores derived from the population, purpose, and circumstances involved in any given data collection." That is, the validity of the test would be ascertained by seeing how clinician's decisions were assisted based on the TAT. Evidence on this front suggests it is a weak guide at best. For example, one study indicated that clinicians classified individuals as clinical or non-clinical at close to chance levels (57% where 50% would be guessing) based on TAT data alone. The same study found that classifications were 88% correct based on [[Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory|MMPI]] data. Using TAT in addition to the MMPI reduced accuracy to 80%.<ref name = Wildman1975>Wildman, R.W., & Wildman, R.W. II. (1975). An investigation into the comparative validity of several diagnostic tests and test batteries. ''Journal of Clinical Psychology'', '''31''', 455-458</ref>