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

writers who have published detailed discussion of formal research and its problems 65 ,
over the relevance of quantitative methodology for assessing the qualitative idiographic
insights provided by interpretation of the productions from projective testing. After a
career of scientific investigation into the psychopathology of art, Wadeson challenged the
received wisdom about what constituted 'schizophrenic' or 'depressed' drawings. She
contended that,
Although the graphic and sculptural characteristics can provide
information about the art therapy client's state, patients of the same
diagnosis may exhibit different graphic or sculptural characteristics" ...
"There is no such thing as a 'schizophrenic picture'. There are confused
looking pictures, fragmented organization, bizarre representations 66 .
Wadeson offered a set of twelve drawings for readers to test their skills to decide if the
artist was psychotic. She implies difficulties.
Few researchers have taken note of criticisms in reviews of projective tests 67 .
Despite the lack of experimental validation 68 , the standardised procedures from projective
65
H. Wadeson (1978), Some uses of art therapy data in research, Am. J. Art Therapy , V.18(1):11-18; Bruce
Males (1979), Is it right to carry out scientific research into art therapy? Therapy V.3:5; Males (1980) Art
Therapy: Investigations and implications, Inscape , 4(2):13-15; T. Dalley (1980), Assessing the therapeutic
effects of art: an illustrated case study, Arts in Psychotherapy , V.7:11-17; David Edwards (1987)
Evaluation op.cit.; Sean McNiff (1986), Freedom of research op.cit.; McNiff (1987) Research and
Scholarship in the creative arts therapies, Arts in Psychotherapy , V.14:285-92 arguing against
inappropriate methods for the subject; Andrea Gilroy (1992), Research in Art Therapy, in Waller and
Gilroy, op.cit., pp.229-247; Michael Franklin and Rosalie Plitsky (1992), The problem of interpretation:
implications and strategies for the field of art therapy, Arts in Psychotherapy , V.19(3):163-175.
66 Wadeson (1987), op.cit. p.93.
67
Generally, A. Anastasi and B. Foley's (1941) 4 article survey of the literature, condemned the poor
quality of research: empirical tests were badly reported, lacking in basic information; associations of
characteristics were idiosyncratic, unreplicated, used extreme groups and results were often contradictory
or uninterpretable (A survey of the literature on artistic behaviour in the abnormal IV, experimental
investigations, J. Gen. Psychol. V.23:187-237). Qualitative variation not differences were noted across
groups especially in writing in (p.193). Research on spontaneous work (Section III,
35
Psychological
Monographs , V.52(6):1-71) revealed "ambiguous ill defined mentalistic concepts which add much
confusion to the problem. It is difficult in certain studies to draw the line between observation and
interpretation" (p.64); In 1968, C.H. Swenson, Empirical Evaluations of Human Figure Drawings,