An examination of relative "card difficulty" (expression from Herman Rorschach) by R-PAS coding is given in Table 3, where each card is listed in descending order on FQo% and in ascending order on FQ-%.
The FQ of the responses is part of some R-PAS indexes such as GHR and PHR, EII-3, TP-Comp, SC-Comp, Complexity, FQo%, FQu%, FQ-%, M-, and WD-%.
The purpose of employing the new R-PAS system led us to take into consideration the changes in FQ coding as a crucial concern.
In the chapter "Comparing the R-PAS and the Rorschach CS FQ tables" of the R-PAS Manual (Meyer et al.
The Rorschach was administrated according to the CS (Exner, 2003) and the responses were coded according to the CS listing of FQ (Exner, 1995/1999), to the R-PAS FQ tables (Meyer et al.
Cardoso (2012) results coincide with those of the present study that showed substantial agreement between the CS and R-PAS on FQn, FQ-, FQu, and FQo when the comparison was at the response level ([kappa] = .
Another interesting piece of data was that the R-PAS highest scores of FQo% were found on cards V I and III while the highest FQ-% scores were found on cards VI, X and IX.
Summarizing, it was found that the R-PAS elicits more FQ ordinary coding while the CS elicits more FQ minus coding.
2011) also compared responses coded according to the CS and to the R-PAS FQ tables, and found that 60.
We and the external judge have coded this answer as FQ- in both CS and R-PAS.
As we could see, the CS and the R-PAS have different ways based on different strategies on coding the FQ- and FQu.
Nevertheless, it confirmed that we can consult the CS or the R-PAS tables interchangeably, however, the better it would be to use the R-PAS tables because of its tendency to identify more FQo and less FQ- perceptions than the CS, and because it encompasses the Form Quality lists of five countries including Brazil.