The psychopathology of everyday art: a quantitative Study - World ...

Less than a third of the drawing areas both discriminated patients from controls
and within diagnostic group. Five drawing areas, which measured subjective content
information, were sensitive to general differentiation of patients and normal controls, but
were insensitive to diagnostic differentiation. Five drawing areas which measured
objective information were sensitive to specific diagnostic differentiation, but were
insensitive to general discriminations between patients and normal controls. This
suggests a major conceptual flaw in constructs common across the field of investigation
explaining the schematics and cognitive constructs of artwork, such as in the description
of the work of art therapy and in psychological drawing tests relating to artistic
psychopathology.
Furthermore the failure to include non-significant findings in the results and
conclusions of much of the literature suggests that current applications of research
findings to the assessment of psychiatric artwork lack construct validity and predictive
validity.
Form and Content variables
There was a demonstrable form effect and it was significant, but low. Against all
predictions from art theory, observational case and series studies and narrative personal
experiences by therapists, particularly of schizophrenics, there was a failure to show
specific effect of form superior to content. However, there were twice as many content
variables; formal variables were often inappropriate for the eventual type of analysis,
were discordant and patchy.
180