Human figure drawings: Their utility in the clinical psychologist's armamentarium for personality assessment.

Roback, Howard B.

doi:10.1037/h0026010

Cited by 130 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 67 publications

(137 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Beginning with Swenson (1957), a parade of reviewers over the past four decades has converged on one virtually unanimous conclusion: the overwhelming majority of human figure drawing signs possess negligible or zero validity (Kahill, 1984;Klopfer & Taulbee, 1976;Motta, Little, & Tobin, 1993;Roback, 1968;Suinn & Oskamp, 1969;Swenson, 1968;Thomas & Jolley, 1998). In particular, published research offers very little support for Machover's (1949) DAP signs of personality and emotional disturbance.…”

Section: Validitymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Scientific Status of Projective Techniques

Lilienfeld

Wood

Garb

2000

Psychol Sci Public Interest

605

391

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-AlthoughControversy has been no stranger to the field of personality assessment, and no issue in this field has been more controversial than the scientific status of projective techniques. Indeed, the novice reader attempting to make sense of the sprawling and bewilderingly complex literature on projective techniques is immediately confronted with a striking paradox. On the one hand, during the past four decades a litany of personality assessment researchers (e.g., Anastasi, 1982;Gittelman Klein, 1986;Dawes, 1994) have come forth to decry the reliability and validity of most projective techniques (see Lilienfeld, 1999). Jensen's (1965) famous quotation, although 35 years old, still captures the sentiments of many contemporary scientists toward the Rorschach Inkblot Test and numerous other projective techniques: ". . . the rate of scientific progress in clinical psychology might well be measured by the speed and thoroughness with which it gets over the Rorschach" (p. 238). On the other hand, clinicians in the United States and to a lesser extent those abroad continue to use projective techniques with great regularity, and many contend that these techniques are virtually indispensable to their daily practice (Watkins, Campbell, Neiberding, & Hallmark, 1995). The crux of this paradox was incisively summed up by Anastasi (1982), who observed that "Projective techniques present a curious discrepancy between research and practice. When evaluated as psychometric instruments, the large majority make a poor showing. Yet their popularity in clinical use continues unabated" (p. 564).Indeed, despite the sustained and often withering criticisms directed at projective techniques during the past several decades (Dawes, 1994;Lowenstein, 1987), numerous surveys demonstrate that such techniques continue to enjoy widespread popularity among clinicians. Durand, Blanchard, and Mindell (1988) reported that 49% of the directors of clinical psychology graduate programs and 65% of the directors of clinical psychology internships believed that formal training in projective techniques is important. Watkins et al. (1995) found that 5 projective techniques, including the Rorschach and Thematic Apperception Test (TAT), were among the 10 instruments most frequently used by clinical psychologists. For example, 82% of clinical psychologists reported that they administered the Rorschach at least "occasionally" in their test batteries and 43% reported that they "frequently" or "always" administered it. There is some indication, however, that the popularity of certain projective techniques may be waning. In a recent survey of practicing clinicians, Piotrowski, Belter, and Keller (1998) reported that several projective techniques, including the Rorschach and TAT, have been abandoned by a sizeable minority of users. Some authors (e.g., Piotrowski et al., 1998; Piotrowski & Belter, 1989) have attributed the recent decline in the popularity of projective techniques to the advent of managed care, although at least some of this decline may al...

show abstract

Section: Validitymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Scientific Status of Projective Techniques

Lilienfeld

Wood

Garb

2000

Psychol Sci Public Interest

605

391

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Not only should the reliability of the individual parts and aspects be determined, but the reliability of patterns should also be studied (p. 463). Roback (1968) also stated that "It is obvious that there is a great need for standardized and validated scales." (p. 16).…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Swensen (1957Swensen ( , 1968Swensen ( , 1977 and Roback (1968) presented a thorough and comprehensive review of research findings derived from empirical investigations of the validity and reliability of Machover's (1949) Draw-A-Person Test as a valuable instrument in personality and diagnostic assessment. Their findings cast considerable doubt on the value of projective drawings.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The inner formal structure of the H-T-P drawings: An exploratory study

Vass

1998

J. Clin. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study describes some interrelated patterns of traits of the House-Tree-Person (H-T-P) drawings with the instruments of hierarchical cluster analysis. First, according to the literature 1 7 formal or structural aspects of the projective drawings were collected, after which a detailed manual for coding was compiled. Second, the interrater reliability and the consistency of this manual was tested. Third, the hierarchical cluster structure of the reliable and consistent formal aspects was analysed. Results are: (a) a psychometrically tested coding manual of the investigated formal-structural aspects, each of them illustrated with drawings that showed the highest interrater agreement; and (b) the hierarchic cluster structure of the formal aspects of the H-T-P drawings of "normal" adults.

show abstract

“…By focusing on outstanding features and signs in children's human figure drawings, psychologists have tried to assess disturbance in children. In studies by Swensen (1957); Roback (1968); Chapman and Chapman (1969); Motta, Little, and Tobin (1993);and Smith and Dumont (1995), this method of inferring children's characteristics did not seem to be valid because individual parts of drawings did not prove to have any specific meaning.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Draw-A-Person Test: An Indicator of Children's Cognitive and Socioemotional Adaptation?

Laak¹,

Goede²,

Aleva

et al. 2005

The Journal of Genetic Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. The authors examined aspects of reliability and validity of the Goodenough-Harris Draw-A-Person Test (DAP; D. B. Harris, 1963). The participants were 115 seven-to nine-year-old students attending regular or special education schools. Three judges, with a modest degree of training similar to that found among practicing clinicians, rated the students' human figure drawings on developmental and personality variables. The authors found that counting details and determining developmental level in the DAP test could be carried out reliably by judges with limited experience. However, the reliability of judgments of children's social and emotional development and personality was insufficient. Older students and students attending regular schools received significantly higher scores than did younger students or students attending special education schools. The authors found that the success of the DAP test as an indicator of cognitive level, socioemotional development, and personality is limited when global judgments are used. The authors concluded that more specific, reliable, valid, and useful scoring systems are needed for the DAP test.

show abstract

Human figure drawings: Their utility in the clinical psychologist's armamentarium for personality assessment.

Cited by 130 publications

References 67 publications

The Scientific Status of Projective Techniques

The Scientific Status of Projective Techniques

The inner formal structure of the H-T-P drawings: An exploratory study

The Draw-A-Person Test: An Indicator of Children's Cognitive and Socioemotional Adaptation?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About