To explore the influence that variations in projective stimuli might have on the respondent's ability to identify with pictorial representations of hands derived from the Hand Test (Wagner, 1961, 1983), 61 young adults (M age = 23) and 60 older adults (M age = 73) were presented with four alternate versions of hand stimuli (young male, young female, old male, and old female) in addition to the original Hand Test. Results indicated main effects for age and gender of respondent, which were primarily consistent with previous Hand Test research. Main effects for gender and age of hand stimuli (p < .05) were also found. Significant interaction effects were revealed for age of respondent by age of hand stimuli and for age of respondent by gender of hand stimuli (p < .05). These interactions resulted in the elicitation of a variety of responses to a differentiated manner than a standard set of Hand Test stimuli. A gender of respondent by gender of hand stimuli interaction effect was also found (p &lt; .05), suggesting that gender alterations of the card may also be beneficial for increasing respondent identification for some individuals. Overall, the results of variations in Hand Test stimuli, as they interact with respondent personal characteristics, indicate the utility of alternate versions of the Hand Test. This is based on the assumption that the respondent will identify with the hand that best resembles his/her hands, resulting in the stimulus performing its projective function to a greater extent.

The purpose of this study was to explore the effects of participants' abused or nonabused status as it interacted with their age and gender in producing different patterns of Hand Test responses as a function of the age or gender of the card. Participants, 61 young adults (M age = 23) and 60 older adults (M age = 73), were presented with the original Hand Test cards, as well as four alternate versions (e.g., young male, young female, older male, and older female). Expected effects varying by age, gender, and abuse status were not found. Results indicated main effects for participant abuse status, which were largely consistent with previous Hand Test research. Significant interaction effects were also found for participant age by participant abuse status (p < .05), as well as participant age by participant gender by participant abuse status (p < .05). An interaction effect was also found for Hand Test version by participant abuse status (p < .05), Hand Test version by participant age by participant abuse status (p < .05), as well as Hand Test version by participant gender by participant abuse status (p < .05). These results suggest that the alternate forms of the cards may pull for certain responses among abused participants that would not have been identified otherwise via the standard version of the Hand Test, clinical interviews, or other projective and self-report measures of personality. Overall, the variations in Hand Test stimuli interact with participants' abuse status, and warrant the use of alternate versions of the Hand Test as a viable projective measure.