A Comparison of the Emotional Indicators on the House-Tree-Person Drawings and the Kinetic ... PDF
Preview A Comparison of the Emotional Indicators on the House-Tree-Person Drawings and the Kinetic ...
Andrews University Digital Commons @ Andrews University Dissertations Graduate Research 2003 A Comparison of the Emotional Indicators on the House-Tree- Person Drawings and the Kinetic-House-Tree-Person Drawing Denise Ann Stoddard Andrews University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/dissertations Part of the Other Psychology Commons Recommended Citation Stoddard, Denise Ann, "A Comparison of the Emotional Indicators on the House-Tree-Person Drawings and the Kinetic-House-Tree-Person Drawing" (2003). Dissertations. 718. https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/dissertations/718 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Research at Digital Commons @ Andrews University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ Andrews University. For more information, please contact Thank you for your interest in the Andrews University Digital Library of Dissertations and Theses. Please honor the copyright of this document by not duplicating or distributing additional copies in any form without the author’s express written permission. Thanks for your cooperation. Andrews University School of Education A COMPARISON OF THE EMOTIONAL INDICATORS ON THE HOUSE-TREE-PERSON DRAWINGS AND THE KINETIC-HOUSE-TREE-PERSON DRAWING A Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy by Denise Ann Stoddard August 2003 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. UMI Number: 3098164 UMI UMI Microform 3098164 Copyright 2003 by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest Information and Learning Company 300 North Zeeb Road P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. A COMPARISON OF THE EMOTIONAL INDICATORS ON THE HOUSE-TREE-PERSON DRAWINGS AND THE KINETIC-HOUSE-TREE-PERSON DRAWING A dissertation presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy by Denise Ann Stoddard APPROVAL BY THE COMMITTEE: Chair: Nancy J. Carbonell DeanX School of Ed^cat ion James Jeffery Membe _ ^ . .1 (?- . Member: Dennis E. Waite Date approved External ETTxv’a^TmTri noerr*: * (^/ Candice Hollingsead Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. ABSTRACT A COMPARISON OF THE EMOTIONAL INDICATORS ON THE HOUSE-TREE-PERSON DRAWINGS AND THE KINETIC-HOUSE-TREE-PERSON DRAWING by Denise Ann Stoddard Chair: Dr. Nancy J. Carbonell Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. ABSTRACT OF GRADUATE STUDENT RESEARCH Dissertation Andrews University School of Education Title: A COMPARISON OF THE EMOTIONAL INDICATORS ON THE HOUSE-TREE-PERSON DRAWINGS AND THE KINETIC-HOUSE-TREE-PERSON DRAWING Name of researcher: Denise Ann Stoddard Name and degree of faculty chair: Nancy J. Carbonell, Ph.D. Date completed: August 2003 Problem Robert Burns, author of the Kinetic-Family- Drawing, - has devised a projective test called the Kinetic-House-Tree-Person drawing. He has taken the House-Tree-Person projective technique and changed the instructions to include all of the figures on one page and also to include an action. In Burns's book on the K-H-T-P he claimed that his drawing gives a better clinical picture of the subject than the H-T-P. However, there is no research that compares the two tests for clinical information. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Method The H-T-P and K-H-T-P were administered to 204 college students 18 years of age and older. These students came from one university in Michigan and one in Illinois. They were a non-clinical sample, meaning that they were not in therapy. Emotional indicators were extracted from the drawings, and then the indicators were analyzed using the Chi Square statistic called the McNemar test. Results There were 499 different emotional indicators found on the drawings, and 108 indicators were found to be significant. There were 74 indicators that were found significantly more often on the H-T-P than on the K-H-T-P. There were 34 indicators that were found significantly more often on the K-H-T-P than on the H-T-P. The H-T-P had indicators in the categories of general drawing characteristic, house, tree, and person. The K-H-T-P had indicators in all of those categories and also in actions, styles, and symbols. The H-T-P had more than twice as many indicators as the K-H-T-P. The category that had the most indicators for both tests was the house, with 56% of the indicators on the H-T-P and 32% on the K-H-T-P. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Conclusions The H-T-P and K-H-T-P differ in the emotional indicators that are evoked from the drawings. With the H-T-P having more than twice as many indicators as the K-H-T-P, it is shown to be a stronger projective technique in eliciting information about the subject. Although similar in name, the tests are not interchangeable. Each test has been shown to have merit, and they could both be used in a psychological assessment battery to add the most amount of information to the clinical picture. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS............................. vi ACKNOWLEDGMENTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii Chapter I . INTRODUCTION................................... 1 The Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Purpose of the Study....................... 5 Significance of the Study ................ 5 Theoretical Framework . . . . . . . . . . 6 Research Question . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Research Hypothesis ....................... 12 Definition of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Delineation of the Research Problem . . . 13 Delimitations .............................. 14 Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Organization of the Study . . . . . . . . 17 II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE..................... 19 Draw-A-Family Drawing .................... 19 The K - F - D ......................... 23 Research With the K-F-D . . . . . . . . . 27 Origination of the H-T-P. . . . . . . . . 38 Early Research With the H - T - P ........... 41 H-T-P Research on Abuse . . . . . . . . . 44 H-T-P Research With College Students. . . 46 Miscellaneous H-T-P Research.............. 49 The K-H-T-P ........... 53 Emotional Indicators. . . . . . . . . . . 60 Chapter Summary ........................... 65 III. METHODOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 Description of the R e s e a r c h .............. 67 Population . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 Selection of the Sample ......... 68 iii Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
The list of books you might like
