02.04.2013 Views

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

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

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

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Results<br />

Interaction effects: <strong>The</strong> mean age <strong>of</strong> the staff was only slightly lower than that <strong>of</strong> the<br />

other groups but there was a clear predominance <strong>of</strong> males in the sample (see table 1).<br />

Only one variable, Space, was found to be influenced by Sex. Space was initially<br />

identified as a variable which distinguished between groups, but there was an interaction<br />

effect with Sex. When co-varied (2-way ANOVA F=0.89, df=4, P=0.47) neither variable<br />

turned out to be significant by itself. No other variable was influenced by sex.<br />

Paintings: Table 3 identifies differentiating variables in bold type, using the Duncan<br />

procedure; significant ANOVA results are indicated.<br />

Table 3: Multiple ranges: group means significantly different at 0.05% level. Dncan<br />

Procedure.<br />

Groups Affective<br />

Disorder<br />

n = 9<br />

Non-Affective<br />

Psychosis<br />

n = 10<br />

238<br />

Brain Injury<br />

n = 11<br />

Drug Abuse<br />

n = 9<br />

Controls<br />

n = 11<br />

VARIABLE mean SD mean SD mean SD mean SD mean SD<br />

Red<br />

Purple<br />

Green<br />

Blue<br />

Brown<br />

White<br />

Black<br />

Space<br />

Em tone<br />

Yellow +<br />

Orange +<br />

Intensity +<br />

Line +<br />

.24 .17<br />

.08 .11<br />

.34 .22<br />

.37 .25<br />

.20 .19<br />

.08 .11<br />

.60 .27<br />

7.71 1.79<br />

1.83 .22<br />

.14 .11<br />

.13* .14<br />

1.92 .53<br />

1.38 .50<br />

.42 .19<br />

.05 .11<br />

.28 .20<br />

.28 .19<br />

.16 .14<br />

.05 .09<br />

.45 .27<br />

5.81 2.65<br />

1.95 .26<br />

.18 .15<br />

.04* .07<br />

1.99 .40<br />

1.73 .28<br />

.22 .17<br />

.13 .23<br />

.23 .19<br />

.34 .26<br />

.13 .23<br />

.10 .13<br />

.40 .28<br />

5.84 2.85<br />

2.04 .13<br />

.12* .15<br />

.04* .06<br />

1.96 .46<br />

1.13* .70<br />

.25 .16<br />

.14 .18<br />

.27 .24<br />

.31 .17<br />

.33 .18<br />

.12 .09<br />

.44 .23<br />

7.42 1.92<br />

1.83 .20<br />

.29 .16<br />

.37 .13<br />

2.00 .48<br />

1.56 .37<br />

.42 .33<br />

.05 .11<br />

.32 .27<br />

.44 .16<br />

.14 .17<br />

.11 .21<br />

.50 .32<br />

7.90 1.74<br />

1.90 .39<br />

38* .33<br />

.07* .09<br />

2.50 .36<br />

1.99* .72<br />

df = 4.<br />

+ Variables identified by ANOVA as Significantly differentiating groups at the 5% level: yellow (p

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!