1 / 18

House-Tree-Person Projective Drawing Technique

House-Tree-Person Projective Drawing Technique. Presentation by: Jean Evans & Kristen Speer CNED 5303 11/11/04. Facts. Author: John N Buck Developed in 1947 with revisions in 1948, 1949, and (Buck and Warren) 1992

Ava
Télécharger la présentation

House-Tree-Person Projective Drawing Technique

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. House-Tree-PersonProjective Drawing Technique Presentation by: Jean Evans & Kristen Speer CNED 5303 11/11/04

  2. Facts • Author: John N Buck • Developed in 1947 with revisions in 1948, 1949, and (Buck and Warren) 1992 • Originally developed as an outgrowth of the Goodenough Scale* utilized to access intellectual functioning

  3. *Florence Goodenough developed Measurement of Intelligence by Drawings in 1926. The instrument focus was on the human figure and its purpose was to derive a measure of I.Q.

  4. Facts (cont.) • Publisher: • Western Psychological Services • 12031 Wilshire Blvd • Los Angeles, CA 90025 • 1-800-648-8857

  5. Cost • Many types of packages available • H-T-P Interpretation Booklet: • 4 page booklet that allows administrator to record, score, and interpret all information from a drawing session • $19.92/package of 25

  6. Purpose • *Designed to aid clinician in obtaining information concerning an individual’s sensitivity, maturity, flexibility, efficiency, degree of personality integration, and interaction with the environment. • *Provides a structured context for the projection of unconscious material. • *http://www.deltabravo.net/custody/psychtests.htm

  7. Purpose (cont) • *Buck felt that artistic creativity represents a stream of flow onto graphic art. He believed that through drawings, subjects objectified unconscious differences by sketching the inner image of the primary process. • *www.guidetopsychology.com/testing.htm

  8. Recommended Use • Use in combination with other projective measurement instruments, usually given first as an “ice-breaker” • Anyone over 3 years of age • Especially appropriate for individuals who are non-English-speaking, culturally different, educationally deprived, or developmentally disabled.

  9. Administration • Client draws three objects: a house, a tree, a person on plain paper • Administrator then uses a Post-Drawing Inquiry checklist (specific questions) to enable client to describe, define, and interpret his/her drawings • Client responses are organized under 8 categories

  10. Administration (cont.) • 8 categories for client responses: • General Observations • Proportion • Perspective • Detailing • Nonessential Details • Irrelevant Details • Line Quality • Use of Color

  11. Drawing Analysis • Drawings are interpreted using two “paths”; intra-subjective and inter-subjective • First path, intra-subjective, considers the content and quality of the three drawings; also explores the depth of material behind the drawings • Second path, inter-subjective, considers features indicative of a certain emotional tendency

  12. Time Factors and Considerations • No time limit (is based on average time) • Paper given to client to draw on should be blank • This is a projective, not a diagnostic, test • Not “standardized” • Can purchase a supplemental interrogation form which derives an IQ score

  13. Reliability/Validity • *Reliability and validity studies have been most supportive of the cognitive uses of the test in 3 to 10 year old children. • *http://www.psychpage.com/projective/proj_draw_notes.html

  14. Normative Data • Not used/appropriate for this type of test as every drawing is different for every person (individualized) • No norms/no standardization data available • Some aspects of drawings may be indicative of psychological trends

  15. Administrator/Interpreter Qualifications • Bachelor’s degree

  16. Personal Evaluation • Limitations: • original test written in 1970’s; Family/cultural values, trends, ideas have changed • Interpretation may be influenced by clinician bias/prejudice

  17. Personal Evaluation(cont) • Advantages: • Good ice-breaker to use in preparation for other tests • Good for engaging reluctant clients • Used for any ages over 3 • Useful for non-verbal clients • Useful for non-English speaking clients

  18. Bibliography • Paul Jerry, Ph.D., Centre for Graduate Education in Applied Psychology, Notes on Projective Drawings • Richard Niolon, Ph.D., Chicago School of Professional Psychology, Notes on Projective Drawings • Western Psychological Services (WPS) • www.behavioraldynamicsphil.com • www.cps.nova.edu/~cpphelp/HTP.html • www.deltabravo.net • www.guidetopsychology.com/testing.htm • www.sydneyplus.ets.org • www.therapeuticchild.ca/children_drawings/tree_test_house_drawings.htm

More Related