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

Did the effect vary with conditions of the study?
Origin: The papers were divided between whose which offered arguments or presented
an opinion and those offering an experience or reporting a programme. Similar
percentages offered no explanation and insight explanations. More opinion studies
offered signpost and healing explanations and many more communication explanations,
but experience studies offered more group interaction and transfer of skill explanations.
Description of study: Only 14% of papers used case material, the majority presented
either illustrative examples or gave no coherent explanation. Nearly half the papers which
described techniques gave a signpost explanation consistent with their advice to generate
them. Advice was more evenly distributed, but just over half gave signpost or healing
explanations. More than half the general recommendation for art papers offered either
signpost or healing explanations, but most of the rest offered no explanation at all.
Table 2a: Environmental description for 253 impressionistic and theoretical papers
according to the explanation of therapeutic art value.
Origin of study
material
opinion
discussion
experience
programme
description of study
case material
technique
advice
general recommend'n
theoretical base
psychotherapeutic
psychoanalysis
environmental
all
studies
n=253
freq %
94 37
44 17
90 36
25 10
35 14
96 38
95 37
27 11
77 30
39 15
53 21
sign
posts
freq %
40 43
14 15
36 39
2 2
11 12
42 46
30 33
9 10
35 38
18 20
10 11
self
healing
freq %
15 42
7 19
14 39
0 0
4 11
6 17
20 56
6 17
10 28
3 8
11 31
55
group
interaction
freq %
4 20
4 20
9 45
3 15
4 20
9 45
6 30
1 5
6 30
2 10
4 20
Insight
Freq %
5 36
3 21
4 29
2 14
2 14
8 57
4 29
0 0
6 43
5 36
1 7
transfer
of skill
freq %
6 33
1 6
7 39
4 22
2 11
9 50
6 33
1 6
6 33
1 6
6 33
communi
cation
freq %
8 57
3 21
3 21
0 0
1 7
2 14
11 79
0 0
4 29
5 36
1 7
no
explanation
freq %
16 27
12 20
17 29
14 24
11 19
20 34
18 30
10 17
10 17
5 8
20 34