Figure

Drawing Test
Nature & History of FD
Methods

FIGURE DRAWING METHODS

Figure drawing methods are performance-based
measures in which persons being examined draw
pictures of people or objects.
The use of figure drawings in personality
assessment is based on the assumption that how
people approach this task and the way they draw
the figures reflect some of their basic dispositions
and concerns and their attitudes toward
themselves and other people.
This assumption derives from the widely
acknowledged extent to which the works of creative
artists tend to mirror their moods and personal
preoccupations.

Frequently used assessment

Test

Rank

HTP

4th after MMPI, RIM, TAT

DAP

7th

KFD

14th

(Camara, Nathan, & Puente, 2000; Hogan, 2005)

Effectiveness with young people

Test

Rank

DAP

5th

HTP

6th

KFD

9th

(Archer & Newsom, 2000; Cashel, 2002)

Effectiveness in school settings

Test

Rank

DAP

Most frequently used

HTP

Most frequently used

KFD

Most frequently used

(Hogan, 2005)

 The structural data in figure drawings consist of

objective features of what people draw.
The core structural features of drawings include
their line quality (heavy or light, continuous or
broken), the size of the figures (large or small), the
placement of figures on the page (middle, top,
bottom, side), and any emphasis on or omission of
basic parts (e.g., person with disproportionately
small head or big ears, person with no hands or
feet, house with a tiny door, tree with no branches,
family with no father).

 Thematic imagery emerges in figure drawing

assessment when people are asked to talk about
what they have drawn.
The behavioral data in figure drawing tests
consist of how people approach their task and
how they interact with the examiner.
Behavior and commentary during test are likely
to mirror aspects of individuals problem-solving
style and their test-taking and interpersonal
attitudes.

 Historically, no one knows when it was first

suggested that what people choose to draw
and how they draw it might shed light on
features of their personality
The formal application of figure drawings in
psychological assessment began with
Florence Goodenough under the mentorship
of Lewis Terman (publishing the Stanford-Binet
Intelligence Scale, 1916)

 Goodenough became interested in

supplementing the Stanford-Binet
with a nonverbal measure of
intellectual maturity in young people
She concluded that the amount of
accurate detail they include in their
drawing of a human figure can
provide such a measure
Goodenoughs pursuit of this belief
led her to develop the Draw-A-Man
test, which was published in 1926

Harris (1963) later revised

the Draw-A-Man by
expanding Goodenoughs
scoring system and
enlarging the
standardization sample for
the test, and he suggested
that children should be
asked to draw not only a
man, but also a woman and
a picture of themselves.

 Shortly after the Draw-A-Man test came into use,

psychologists began considering the possibility
that childrens figure drawings could reveal
differences among them in their personality
characteristics as well as their intellectual maturity.
It was not until 1949, however, that Karen
Machover, then a senior psychologist at Kings
County Psychiatric Hospital in New York, published
the first formal method for assessing personality
with a figure drawing task that she called the DrawA-Person test

 Machover recommended using the DAP with

persons of all ages, not just children, and
obtaining drawings of both male and female
figures.
(Machover, 1951), she elaborated the notion
that structural features of the human figures
people draw are likely to reflect their
underlying attitudes and concerns and many of
their personality traits.

 Exp: the drawing of small figures might

indicate low self-esteem or timidity, whereas
the drawing of large figures could be a sign of
self-confidence or grandiosity.
The placement of figures high on the page
might reflect high levels of aspiration and
achievement striving, she hypothesized,
whereas placement low on the page could
identify insecurity and feelings of inadequacy.

 Machover also formulated numerous

hypotheses concerning the specific meaning
of various features of how the head, eyes,
nose, ears, hair, mouth, neck, and other body
parts are drawn and of how the figures are
dressed.
Also include an inquiry procedure in which
examinees are asked to make up a story
about this person as if he were a character in
a play or novel (Machover, 1951, p. 345).

 The questions concern such matters as the

age, education, occupation, and ambitions of
the figures; how the figures feel about
themselves, their family, and their friends; and
what attitudes the figures have toward school,
sex, and marriage.

Projective uses (Klepsch & Logie, 1982)

As a measure of personality: derive information
about the uniqueness of the drawer & he sees
himself
As a measure of self in relation to others: when
children drew themselves in particular group, their
project their view of themselves in relation to the
others in the group
As a measure of group values: exp different cultural
and racial groups in drawing
As a measure of attitude: having children draw
specific people, reveal their feeling about these
particular (professional) people, exp doctor, nurses,
teachers

Nonprojective uses
Can be used to measure a childs
developmental or intellectual maturity
In the child study (1900-1915), 2 important
findings : the order of development in the
drawings of children is constant; and children
of lower ability generally make inferior
drawings
Using Goodenough-Harris DAM test, various
researchers have found that as children
increase in age, so does the details in their
drawings

Scoring system for estimating IQ:

Buck (1948)
HTP
Koppitz (1968)
HFD
Dunleavy, Hanson, & Szasz (1981) found Koppitzs
scoring system useful for identifying kindergarten
children who were not ready for school
Harris views the HFD as a measure of intellectual
or conceptual maturity; ability to perceive/
discriminate similarities & differences, to abstract/
classify objects according to similarities &
differences, & generalize/ assign a discriminates
object to a correct class