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

social/developmental
energy theories
assessment
19 7
31 12
34 13
4 4
9 10
16 17
2 6
8 22
2 6
explanation - how it
works
no's in each group 92 36 36 14 20 8 14 5 18 7 14 5 59 23
56
2 10
4 20
2 10
0 0
0 0
2 14
1 6
2 11
2 11
1 7
2 14
1 7
Complete descriptions of value to therapy categories appear in Appendix 1.
Theoretical base: The most popular theoretical base was psychotherapeutic. Half the
environmental and the developmental studies offered no explanation and most of the rest
used signpost or healing explanations. Despite the theoretical orientation of the
discussion or therapy, the signpost explanation was more prevalent than any other. The
assessment methods predictably concentrated on signposts, but a considerable percentage
of psychotherapeutically orientated papers explained the function of art as an energy or
power derived through the therapist or through the patient or through communication
with the unconscious. However, where the discussion centred on the mystical conduction
of healing power through the therapist to the patient or where the art environment and
the practice of art itself was thought to be therapeutic in some way, there was still an
equal focus on the signpost explanation.
Table 2b: Commonly claimed benefits for 253 impressionistic and theortetical papers
according to explanation of the therapeutic value of art
Benefits to patient 104
express feelings
develop skill
communicate
self awareness
symptom relief
relationship
all
studies
freq %
156 22
107 15
159 22
125 18
140 20
22 3
sign
posts
freq %
72 26
30 11
64 23
43 16
53 19
10 4
self
healing
freq %
19 19
12 12
21 21
20 20
24 24
2 2
group
interaction
freq %
12 20
12 20
13 21
11 18
11 18
2 3
Insight
Freq %
7 17
7 17
8 19
8 19
10 24
1 2
transfer
of skill
freq %
8 15
8 15
10 19
15 29
9 17
2 4
communi
cation
freq %
9 21
4 9
14 33
8 19
6 14
1 2
9 15
6 10
9 15
no
explanation
freq %
29 20
34 24
29 20
20 14
27 19
4 3
104 There were four measures of benefits to patients allowing 4 answers in any order. Frequency and
percentage here represent totalised positive answers to reduce non-answering bias: only 5% (13) of studies
did not describe one benefit for the patient, but many studies gave two or more benefits.