Somatic Inkblot Test (SIT 30) Diagnostic Report
AI-Enabled Scoring • Cassell & Dubey Normative SystemThe 11 Standardized Scoring Categories
Quantitative results computed across the 30 stimulus plates, benchmarked against corporate executive and clinical normative standards (Dubey & Cassell):
| # | Scoring Category | Subject Score | Subject % | Executive Norms | Clinical Interpretation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Total Number of Responses (R) | 30 | — | 25 – 35 (SIT 30) | Healthy imaginative capacity & functional intelligence |
| 2 | Human Responses (H) | 18 | 60% | 20% – 25% | Strong self-concept and healthy interpersonal interest |
| 3 | Animal Responses (A) | 4 | 13.3% | < 15% | Adaptive psychological maturity; low stereotypical thinking |
| 4 | Anatomical Responses (At) | 12 | 40% | < 15% | Preoccupation with somatic symptoms or bodily vulnerability |
| 5 | Sex Responses (Sex) | 1 | 3.3% | About 6% (≤ 2) | Balanced recognition of sensuous structures; absence of sexual anxiety |
| 6 | Movement Responses (M) | 11 | — | 6 – 10 | Active kinesthetic drive, creative imagination, and positive mood |
| 7 | Most Typical Responses (MT) | 13 / 18 | — | > 10 Responses | Strong group conformity, team orientation, and coherent reality testing |
| 8 | Typical Responses (T) | 30 | 100% | > 50% | High conventionality; perceptions match healthy population norms |
| 9 | Atypical Responses (AT) | 0 | 0% | < 12% | Within normative limits; absence of thought disorganization |
| 10 | Rejection of Images (Rej) | 0 / 30 | 0% | < 1% (0 Cards) | Zero rejection; robust cognitive engagement |
| 11 | Pathological Scales Composite | PAS: 0 | D: 0 | HAS: 0 | P: 0 | — | Almost Nil | Normal baseline; absence of acute psychopathology |
Body Boundary Index (BBI) & Dubey et al. Executive Norms
Dubey et al. Multi-Group Normative Benchmark Comparison
| Variable | Subject Profile | Normal Adults (N=2,450) | Neurotic / Anxiety (N=820) | Psychosomatic (N=650) | Schizophrenia (N=480) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total Responses (R) | 30 | 28.4 ± 5.2 | 24.1 ± 6.8 | 25.6 ± 5.9 | 18.2 ± 7.4 |
| Barrier Score (Br) | 1 | 6.4 ± 1.8 | 4.1 ± 1.6 | 3.2 ± 1.4 | 2.1 ± 1.2 |
| Penetration (Pn) | 0 | 3.1 ± 1.2 | 4.8 ± 1.9 | 7.6 ± 2.4 | 6.8 ± 2.7 |
| Body Boundary Index (BBI) | 1.00 | 0.67 ± 0.08 | 0.46 ± 0.11 | 0.30 ± 0.09 | 0.24 ± 0.12 |
| Somatic Concentration (SCI%) | 40% | 29.5% ± 5.8% | 34.2% ± 7.1% | 56.8% ± 8.4% | 38.4% ± 9.8% |
Seven Core Psychological Area Clusters (Table 1 Mappings)
In the SIT 30 framework, specific stimulus images are clinically mapped to evaluate dedicated domains of emotional and somatic functioning:
Probing connection, partnership, and social empathy. Normal responses: dancing pairs, conversing figures, mother and child.
Reflects core self-worth, autonomy, and identity integration. Normal responses: dancing woman, resting soul, running athlete.
Evaluates visceral perception and boundary integrity. Normal responses: ribcage, heart, kidneys, spine, raised palm.
Measures integration of psychosexual maturity. Sensitive probe for sexual conflict, avoidance, or trauma-related defense.
Evaluates aggressive drive and impulse modulation. Normal responses: folding knives, paper airplanes, cork popping.
Probes core existential security. Atypical responses reveal feelings of being helpless, damaged, or in peril.
The primary corporate leadership and ego-strength indicator. High conformity across these 15 images confirms strong reality contact and team synergy.
Clinical Considerations & Organ-Specific Rejection Analysis
Clinical Integration Note: Material projected on the SIT 30 must be assimilated by the clinician alongside overall medical and psychiatric history. Responses conceptually tap into the same stream of imagery as dreams, daytime fantasies, and active imagination. Variations such as somatic repression (leaving anatomical images blank or describing them as inanimate objects) provide vital insights into conversion symptoms and unconscious defense structures.