Drawing Techniques in Assessment: A Summary Review of 60 Survey-Based Studies of Training and Professional Settings

Abstract

Over the last 75 years, drawing techniques have been popular measures as tools both in the USA (Cox, 2012; Handler & Hilsenroth, 1998; Handler & Smith, 2013; Handler & Thomas, 2014;Harrison, 2015; McGrath & Carroll, 2012; Newmark, 1985; Piotrowski & Keller, 1992, 2015a; Roback, 1968), and internationally (e.g., Dutta & Sanyal, 2016; Negi, 2015; Piotrowski et al., 1993; Stiles et al., 2015). Historically, drawing tests have generated scholarly criticism by clinicians and academicians, even during the zenith of their popularity (e.g., Butcher, 2006; Vukovich, 1983). Hence, these instruments have harbored a contentious place in the general field of (Gresham, 1993; Lally, 2001; Lilienfeld et al., 2015; Piotrowski, 1984; Wood et al., 2002; Yama, 1990).In addition, there has been lively debate, even amongst advocates, with regard to interpretive approaches of specific drawing techniques over many decades (e.g., see Handler 1996; Handler & Habenicht, 1994; Meyer et al., 2001; Reithmiller & Handler, 1997). In fact, Ziskin (1995, pp. 870-876) devoted a 7-page rebuke, based largely on condescending commentaries regarding drawing methods:... research indicates that conclusions based on DAP drawings be primarily determined by factors or drawing characteristics that are secondary to, or even unrelated to the diagnostic categories or criteria of interest (p. 874).Proponents of human figure drawings (hereon, HFDs), however, counter critics based largely on the rich idiographic material garnered from drawing techniques. For example, Hammer (1985) proffers: Symbolically, potent concepts such as H-T-P are saturated with emotional and ideational experiences associated with the personality's development (p. 135), and suggests that drawing methods have several major attributes such as brevity, predominantly non-verbal, culture-free, open expressiveness, non-threatening, and is a vehicle in fostering a conducive 'introduction' to the enterprise. In this vein, Flanagan and Motta (2007) contend that figure drawings may aid in establishing rapport with youth and provide a springboard for practitioner hypotheses, guiding the course of the assessment (p. 257). Accordingly, these advantageous features seem to be particularly critical in the of children (see Handler, 1996, pp. 208-211).In support of projective tests, Weiner and Greene (2008) argue that drawing techniques can serve as a prodigious precursory tool in screening psychological disturbance or maladjustment identified through 'enquiry' that targets and reflects personality dynamics (i.e., conflicts, needs, 'press', self-perceptions, and coping style).It must be acknowledged, based on empirical research, that findings involving drawing techniques have not been entirely encouraging (Kahill, 1984; Swensen, 1968). However, much of this literature has been critiqued with regard to flaws in research design. Handler (1996)aptly summarized it here:...many studies are poorly conceived because they do not parallel the ways in which the drawings are used in the clinical situation. For example, the drawings are typically investigated alone, taken out of context, and individual variables and signs are analyzed rather than allowing for contextual interpretation (p. 288).Despite perennial criticism, specific drawing instruments have received parsimonious coverage in major textbooks and handbooks regarding testing (Groth-Marnat, 2009; Hammer, 1985; Handler, 1996; Harwood et al., 2011;Murstein, 1965; Rabin, 1986), as well as in books specifically on the general topic of drawing techniques (e.g., Burns, 1982; Dana, 2014; Hammer, 1978; Koppitz, 1984;Machover, 1949; Wenck, 1984).Historical ContextGraduate-level Training SettingsFrom a historical perspective (i.e., prior to 1990), attitudes of mental health practitioners toward drawing techniques remained rather positive; however, views of clinical faculty and internship directors toward some projective tests have been more tepid (Piotrowski 1999, 2015b for review). …

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 5 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.