TY - JOUR
T1 - Size doesn’t matter
T2 - Emotional content does not determine the size of objects in children’s drawings
AU - Strange, Deryn
AU - Hoynck Van Papendrecht, Heleen
AU - Macleod, Emily
AU - Candel, Ingrid
AU - Hayne, Harlene
PY - 2010/5/7
Y1 - 2010/5/7
N2 - In Experiment 1 we examined whether children spontaneously alter the size of objects in their drawings of emotionally-laden events. To do this, we evaluated children’s drawings of their own personal, past experiences. Children were asked to draw a picture of an event that had made them happy and an event that had made them sad. We found no differences in the size of object that children drew in their positive and negative emotional events. In Experiment 2, we asked adults with and without clinical training to discriminate children’s drawings of happy events from their drawings of sad events. There was no difference in the accuracy of raters as a function of clinical expertise. Moreover, performance for both groups was at chance when we removed drawings with specific emotional indicators from the set (e.g. smiles or tears). We conclude that the emotional interpretation of drawings on the basis of the size of objects in that drawing is fraught with difficulty. We question the projective use of drawings in forensic and clinical practice. Keywords: child; memory; interview procedures; emotion; clinical assessment
AB - In Experiment 1 we examined whether children spontaneously alter the size of objects in their drawings of emotionally-laden events. To do this, we evaluated children’s drawings of their own personal, past experiences. Children were asked to draw a picture of an event that had made them happy and an event that had made them sad. We found no differences in the size of object that children drew in their positive and negative emotional events. In Experiment 2, we asked adults with and without clinical training to discriminate children’s drawings of happy events from their drawings of sad events. There was no difference in the accuracy of raters as a function of clinical expertise. Moreover, performance for both groups was at chance when we removed drawings with specific emotional indicators from the set (e.g. smiles or tears). We conclude that the emotional interpretation of drawings on the basis of the size of objects in that drawing is fraught with difficulty. We question the projective use of drawings in forensic and clinical practice. Keywords: child; memory; interview procedures; emotion; clinical assessment
U2 - 10.1080/10683160902862213
DO - 10.1080/10683160902862213
M3 - Article
VL - 16
SP - 459
EP - 476
JO - Psychology, Crime and Law
JF - Psychology, Crime and Law
IS - 6
ER -