ReviewChildren (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Projective in Time: A Systematic Review on the Use of Construction Projective Techniques in the Digital Era-Beyond Inkblots.
Review in Children (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Differential linguistic patterns across Rorschach, TAT, and SCT in individuals with PTSD.European journal of psychotraumatology · 2026Article
- A measurement study of the relationship between personality traits and learning emotions among music learners: a psychometric analysis in an educational context.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Construction and Initial Psychometric Validation of the Morana Scale: A Multidimensional Projective Tool Developed Using AI-Generated Illustrations.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundProjective instruments have historically been used to explore unconscious dynamics and personality traits in children and adolescents. However, concerns about their psychometric properties have led to ongoing debates in clinical psychology. This review aims to critically reassess the use of construction projective techniques in clinical settings for individuals aged 4 to 18 years, also examining the available psychometric data reported in recent scientific literature, excluding the Rorschach Test due to its extensive coverage in existing literature.
methodsA systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, Psychoanalytic Electronic Publishing (PEP), and the Cochrane Library were searched for studies published between 2010 and 2024. Inclusion criteria encompassed studies focusing on construction projective techniques administered to clinical and non-clinical samples aged 4 to 18 years.
resultsFrom an initial pool of 641 articles, 25 met the inclusion criteria. These studies indicate that construction projective techniques remain valuable in accessing children's and adolescents' inner worlds, particularly in diagnostic and therapeutic contexts. However, 13 of the 25 analyzed studies lack detailed psychometric evaluations, and the overall methodological quality was medium-low (4.4/9). Recent adaptations of these techniques show promise in increasing their applicability and relevance.
conclusionsConstructive projective tests continue to offer unique insights into the psychological functioning of young individuals. While not definitive diagnostic tools, they serve as effective supplements in clinical assessments and therapeutic interventions when applied with awareness of their limitations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.