A few months back I took an on-line ink blot test (at Why? Because I was curious. I read the results of psychological tests with a fair degree of skepticism. A lot of them seem to be of the form:

Which do you prefer, outdoor or indoor activities?
x Indoor
_ Outdoor

Calculating Results...

Test results for Virgil
This incredibly perceptive test has discovered that you are an indoor person. You are in good company here. Albert Einstein was a very famous indoor person.
i.e. a lot of these tests just repackage the answers you have given, without really telling you anything new.
Some will try to slot you into one of a number of character types based on your answers. These provide some chance of telling you something you didn't already know, but only to the extent that you match one of the types. If you happen to fall into the in-between spectrum, you get force fitted into the nearest available stereotype.
Of course, any one of these psychological tests is better than the horoscope or name-analysis tests. I have to admire the output of these tests for the way they tune into the self-vs-not-self nature of the way people think. They play on the things that we like to think are our own, but actually are true of most people. e.g. everyone likes to think they have an ability to appreciate beauty in ways that others don't; everyone has some deep, small insecurities that they don't let show. By listing a number of these identity-affirming generalities, along with a mixture of non-committal statements about possibilities, a horoscope can seem to be 90% correct.
Anyway, back to the ink blot. I'd always wondered about whether this type of test could really tell me anything. It beats the "how would you react in this scenario" tests, because it can't just regurgitate your input or simply classify you based on how you say you would react. It has to base its classification system on what I perceive as meaning in a random symmetrical picture. Here are the results:

Virgil, your unconscious mind is driven most by Curiosity.
This means you are full of questions about life, people, and the potential of your future. You spend more time than others envisioning the possibilities of your life things that others are too afraid to consider.
Your curiosity burns with an almost physical need to know and do more. It's only through new experiences that you feel a greater understanding of yourself or the world which ultimately is the greatest way for you to feel satisfied.
It is possible that the underlying reason for your drive towards curiosity is a deeply rooted fear of boredom. That means that you are probably more susceptible than others to feel like you're falling into a rut when life slows down into a comfortable routine.
You need to make sure you have stimulation in your life that makes you feel like you're innovating or being exposed to the ideas and experiences that truly inspire you.
With such a strong orientation towards curiosity, you're also prone to a rebellious quality that shows up when you feel you are just going through the motions, and are unable to really influence the world around you. But interestingly enough, your drive towards novel experiences also indicates an openness others don't have, but wish they did.
Unconsciously, your curiosity presses you to learn more, experience more, and get the most out of life.

The results seemed to hit pretty close to the mark - or did they? How much of the output was true enough about anybody? Would I have felt the same about any of the canned reports that could have been produced? I could go back to the test multiple times and try to answer it in a different way each time to get all the different output types. Then I could compare all of them and decide which seemed to fit me best. There are only two problems with that:
1. My self assessment would be biased by my own self-image - not objective like the test.
2. Considering the time it would take, I'm not quite that curious.