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

directly to the environment; assessment includes the objects within it so that it appears
widespread, whereas a simple groundline would have 'located' the objects 325 . The DAPA
uses a definition of covered area of the picture, as a less common but recognised objective
assessment 326 and does not distinguish between these kinds of visual representation. The
patient scores indicate they produced less on the paper, but also indicate sketchy work,
which is often seen as empty because it lacks richness, solidity and detail. A thin yellow
wash could be described as empty space to someone looking for a depiction of a visual
plane, and filled, by someone looking for floating objects or a ground, but the DAPA
would record that 'space' as filled without exception. No group in this study consistently
produced much uncovered space. Any mark within the field was included and the 'space-
bubble' was estimated around it 327 - if there were two spaces in the square, only one was
included. Thus sometimes the picture would look as if it had more space than the score
for space indicated.
Alternative explanations offered for results from the discussion of intensity and
line that the type of measurement may have obscured the results when they were
extreme, cannot apply here. The weighting of 5, given to empty squares would have
given a higher average score if applied throughout the picture. Therefore there must have
been a considerable portion of the population with 55-75% filled space. It could be
325 See explanations of this definition in Cohen, Hammer and Singer (1988), op.cit.; Gantt (1990), op.cit.
326 Wright and McIntyre (1982, op.cit.) found significant differences in depressive and normal controls
using a similar method; Russell-Lacy et al. (1979, op.cit.) used 'a template' (the only description) to
quantify space and found differences in patients and controls on covered paper; the DDS - Cohen, Hammer
and Singer (1988, op.cit.) found that patients mainly used '33-99%' of paper, but the actual range covered
was indeterminable as it allowed an inch around the perimeter of the paper for the extra 1%!
327 see definition for space DAPA rating guide 1994, methods section.
298