In its small history, this projective methodology swept the planet, and only a lazy psychologist did not hear about it. Demand grew, and supply grew, the quality of which increasingly leaves much to be desired. Below I will present the main indicators.
1) Fashion for MAC manufacturing. Some of the author's MAC decks are created to increase the "price tag" of the therapist. "My status is growing, I'm becoming more popular." The question of the necessity and usefulness of the deck goes to the background.
2) Poor picture. It's about amateur artistic performance, the use of online resources or photos. It is important to note that the problem is considered to be poor quality, which does not allow to freely associate and develop the metaphor.
3) Substitution of concepts metaphor and symbolization. Initially, the MAС in psychotherapy was used to help the client express A through B. But when you open a deck that the author claims to be created to work with the sexual sphere, for example, and on the pictures are essentially postures and bodies ... or when working with trauma to depict scenes of violence, catastrophes ...what kind of metaphor can we talk about?
4) Adaptation (softly said, if not plagiarized) of existing decks. This is most clearly seen on portrait cards. The abundance of images, archetypes, roles, etc., is off scale. And the explanation why these pictures should be in the deck is not always heard..
5) Use of stamps. Some metaphors stably roam from one deck to another (for example: an egg, transformation into a butterfly, doors, etc.). This already deprives the deck of originality.
6) Lack of scientific justification. The use of esoteric and pseudo-scientific concepts when creating maps or the complete absence of structure at all. Here the danger lies in the unsafe use of the technique for the client.
7) Inadequate pricing policy. The spread of prices and quality sometimes reaches striking proportions. The consumer is easily confused in the variety of choices. And disappointments form a general distrust of the genre.
8) Presence of copies and fakes. Use in practice of a poor-quality instrument (distorted color rendition, texture of material, etc.) reduces the quality of work, and discontent is mistaken for the genre as a whole.
9) Lack of training standards. Some psychologists, after listening to dozens of hours of lectures and seminars on the IAC, decide that they can teach no worse. Assemble the audience, for which distorted, one-sidedly and incorrectly submit information.
The list of abstracts is open, you can add your own in comments. Finally, I just want to add that despite the above problems, from time to time appear "decks-gems." Be attentive, critical and sensible when choosing a working tool.
27/06/2018 Aleksandr Pushkov