Draw A Person: Screening Procedure for Emotional Disturbance

Transcript Draw A Person: Screening Procedure for Emotional Disturbance

Human Figure Drawings in Personality Evaluations: Old Controversy, New Data

Achilles N. Bardos University of Northern Colorado School Psychology Programs (970) 351-1629 e-mail: [email protected]

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Human Figure Drawing

 What can we say about the girl who drew this picture of herself (9 yrs. old)?

 Is she intellectually normal?

 Does she have emotional problems?

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

100 years of history

 Luquet (1903)  intellectual development  changes in drawings reflect emotional stability Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

DAP History

(continues)  Goodenough (1926)  Drawings reflect intellectual level and provide information about the emotional aspects of a child (Goodenough, 1926)  Drawing “probably carry profound meaning, had we but the wisdom to understand them (Goodenough, p. 60).”  Conclusion: Human figure drawings are multidimensional in nature Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

DAP History

(continues)  Lewis (1928)  viewed drawings as more valuable than dreams in understanding interpersonal relationships.

 Buck (1948)  The most well known effort to interpretation  H-T-P Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

DAP History

(continues)  MACHOVER (1948)  “Personality projection in the drawing of the HF”  A one to one relationship was hypothesized to exist between particular signs and areas of conflict the drawer might be experiencing.

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

DAP History (continues)

 Koppitz (1968)  most recent approach that uses total number of items  first actuarial method attempting to differentiate meaningful from non-meaningful items Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Critical reviews

  Machover’s hypothesis lacks empirical support Koppitz’s system failed the test of diagnostic validity  Literature review conclusions  lack of objectivity in scoring  number of items more important in discriminating normal from clinical groups  global aspects should be used for interpretation  Use DAP as a screening measure Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Frequency of DAP use?

 The DAP continues to be ranked in the 10 most frequently used instruments in personality evaluations.

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Arguments Against the Use of HFD

   

Popularity should not equate with clinical utility Questions about validity- can drawing by a person tell about that person’s behavior, personality or emotions?

Experts aren’t any more accurate in interpretation than the untrained.

Use with other tests won’t give any additional information. Don’t use less valid test with valid.

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

  

Artistic ability affects the score on these tests.

Cites research against and flawed studies-why do studies with the psychiatric population, it is obvious they are disturbed.

They are popular due to ease of administration and lower cost.

Arguments for the Use of Human Figure Drawing Tests

 They utilize a variety of methods, techniques and scoring. It is hard to group all DAP tests together.

 Recent tests like DAP:SPED made scoring more objective and standardized.

 Psychologists know that using a multi-method approach yields better results.

 Literature also supports the use and utility of human figure drawing tests.

 Efficiency of resources used(personnel, instruments).

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

DAP:SPED Development

 We studied over 75 years of research on DAP and found the following needs:  Scoring rules were vague and lacked objectivity and had low reliability (Roback, 1968; Swensen, 1957, 1968)  Items associated with emotional disturbance appear in drawings of nondisturbed children  The number of items found is more important than the presence of any single item (Koppitz, 1968) Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

DAP:SPED Development

 One-to-one interpretation of one sign to a specific interpretation lacked empirical support  Global interpretation is effective to identify children with emotional problems (Kahill, 1984; Roback, 1968; Swensen, 1957, 1968)  DAPs can be used for screening purposes for gross levels of maladjustment  DAPs can be used for evaluation of emotional and intellectual dimensions (Koppitz, 1968).

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Draw A Person: Screening Procedure for Emotional Disturbance - DAP:SPED

Jack A. Naglieri Timothy J. McNeish Achilles N. Bardos 1991 Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

DAP:SPED Development Goals

 A DAP scoring system should:  have objective items  include experimentally validated items  Be normed on a representative sample  Have good reliability  Show differentiation of known groups Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

DAP:SPED Test Construction

 Collected many potential items  Subjected the initial items to careful review and revision to ensure objectivity  Tested the items’ rates of occurrence in the normal standardization sample  Only selected items that were unusual (that is equal to or more than 1SD from the mean) Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Item Types

 Measurement items  Tall or short Figure  Small or big figure  Top or Bottom placement  Left or Right placement  Slanting figure  Content items  sign is present or not Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Base Rates of Original Items

Smiling mouth Slash mouth Arms Outstretched Feet Shading Frowning Mouth Talons Monster Neck Omitted Aggressive symbols Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

.723

.090

.230

.247

.017

.130

.007

.230

.010

Drawing Size

 How do you know when a child draws a small figure?

 How do you know when the figure is close to the page?

 What is normal !

 Ages 9-12:  Height =105 mm  Width = 54 mm

68 mm

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

97 mm 74 mm 93 mm

What is Abnormal Size

 For Ages 9-12 Mean Height Width 105 54 Top Bottom Left Right 74 97 68 93 SD 36 25 36 39 18 20  Mean + or - 1 SD > 1SD Tall Short > 140 < 70 Top Plcmt Top < 39 Bottom > 135 Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

DAP:SPED Standardization

 2,260 children (6780 drawings were evaluated on 93 items)  Ages 6 - 17 years  Representative of the US on the basis of  Age  Gender  Race  Geographic Region  Ethnicity  Socioeconomic Status Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Psychometric Properties

 Reliability  Internal consistency  Inter-rater reliability  Intra-rater reliability  Test-retest stability Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Reliability

 Internal Reliability  Typical projective test reliability is the .20s (Anastasi, 1988)  DAP:SPED Total Test Reliabilities are 

Ages 6-8 = .76



Ages 9-12 = .77



Ages 13-17 = .71

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Validity evidence for the DAP:SPED

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

DAP:SPED Validity

 McNeish & Naglieri (1993) Journal of Special Education, 27, 115-121  81 Special Ed (SED)  81 Regular Ed  Matched Groups  All males (75% white)  7-13 years of age  SED earned significantly higher mean T-score (55.3; SD =10.6) than control group (49.5; SD=8.6) SED >55 49% Normal 32% < 55 51% 68% Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

DAP:SPED Validity

 Naglieri, & Pfeiffer, S. I. (1992). Psychological Assessment, 4, 156-159.

 54 Subjects in psychiatric day treatment at the Devereux Foundation & 54 matched controls  DSM-III-R Disruptive Behavior Disorders  Age range 7-17 years, 78% males; 95% white  DAP:SPED means significantly different  56.6 (SD 10.3) vs 49.4 (SD =8.7)  78% of controls and 48% of DBD correctly identified  SPED improves accuracy of prediction by 25% Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Additional Studies with the DAP:SPED



Psychiatric Residential Sample



Public School Setting with ED students/New York



Public School Setting with ED students/Colorado



Learning Disabled Students/Ohio



Hearing Impaired Students



5 recent dissertations

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Study 1.

Psychiatric Residential Sample

Males Females Age Clinical Group 33 16 15.3 years Control Group 177 41 14.5 years Race Black White Hispanic Other 7 36 3 3 Other Clinical Group Information ` Committee on Special Education (3) 4 211 - 3 Court Referral Yes 44 No 5 Court Decision: In Need of Supervision (37), Juvenile Delinquents (7)

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Study 1.

Psychiatric Residential Sample

Age DAP:SPED Percentages Sample N Mean SD Mean SD Males White Clinical 49 15.3

1.1

57.0

6.4

67 33 Normal 218 12.9

2.2

49.1

8.1

T-test = 7.41, p<.001

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

DAP:SPED and Self Concept (study 1)

Mean SD Pearson Corr.

DAP: SPED MSCS Social Personal Competence Personal Affection Achievement Family Physical Total

Note: * p< .05

** p< .01

57.0

103.9

97.8

97.6

97.3

92.2

100.4

95.8

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

6.4

17.5

15.7

15.9

15.3

.04

.06

-.26* .14

15.0

-.43** 18.6 -.19

16.8

-.17

Study 1.

Psychiatric Residential Sample

DAP:SPED MSCS Social P. Comp.

P. Affec.

Achieve.

Family Physical Total Nonreferred (N=22) Referred (N=26) Mean SD Mean SD 51.8

106.3

97.8

103.9

95.7

96.0

106.7

100.4

2.1

61.3

19.9

20.3

18.5

16.1

16.6

15.5

17.5

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

101.9

97.7

92.5

98.6

88.9

95.3

92.0

5.1

15.3

11.1

11.4

14.7

12.9

19.6

15.4

Efficiency of Classification with ED Adolescents (study 1)

Emotional Classification DAP: SPED Decision Do not Refer Refer for Further Evaluation Normal 160 56 ED 22 27 Sensitivity: Specificity: .55

.74

Efficiency of outcome “refer” .33

Efficiency of “do not refer” .85 55% of children scoring 55 or above will be correctly identified Accurate screening predictions were made for 74% of the children There is a 33% chance that a child referred will have emotional difficulties 85% chance that a child referred will be judged as being normal

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Study 2.

ED Students In Public School Setting

Males Females Age 6-8 9-12 13-17 Race Black White Hispanic Other ED Group 50 8 Mean 7.2 years 11.5 years 14.9 years 7 36 3 3

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Control Group 226 38 Mean 6.9 years 10.8 years 14.7 years 4 211 - 3

Study 2. Additional Relevant Information

Mean WISC-R VIQ = 96.3

PIQ = 95.3

FSIQ = 94.9

SD 11.1

16.8

12.4

Program in Special Education Option II 38

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Sample ED

Study 2.

Age Mean SD DAP:SPED Percentages Mean SD Males White

12.1

1.2

54.8

9.2

86 91

Normal

262 11.3

1.0

49.7

9.0

t-test = 3.85, p< . 001

86 Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

97 36

Results of DAP:SPED Classification (study 2).

Group’s Emotional Classification Normal Emotionally Disturbed DAP:SPED Decision Do Not Refer 191 30 Refer for Further Evaluation 71 28

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Efficiency of Classification (study 2)

Hit Rates Sensitivity Specificity: .48

.73

What this means: 48% of those scoring 55 or above will be correctly identified Accurate screening predictions were made for 73% of the children Efficiency of screening outcome “refer” Efficiency of screening outcome “do not refer” .28

There is a 28% chance that a child referred by DAP:SPED will be judged as having emotional difficulties .86

There is a 86% chance that a child not being referred by DAP:SPED will be judged as normal

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Study 3 EBD Students in Colorado

Subjects: 42 students identified SIEBD (Significant Identifiable Emotional/Behavioral Disorder) Age: 8-17 years Sex: 38 males 4 females Race: Black Hispanic White American Indian 6 1 34 1

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Study 3. Instruments Administered



DAP: SPED



Emotional and Behavior Problem Scale (EBPS) by teacher



Multidimensional Self Concept Scale (MSCS)

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Study 3 DAP:SPED and EBPS

DAP:SPED 54.2

EBPS--Empirical Interp.

Aggre/Conduct Disorder 8.1

Emo. Withdrawal/Depress. 8.4

Learning Comp. Disorder Avoidance/Unresponsive Aggre/Self Destructive Total (Sum of St. Scores) 8.3

8.0

9.0

41.0

10.0

40-80 3.4

3.1

3.2

2.6

2.9

12.0

1-12 0-12 1-13 1-12 0-13 10-60

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Study 3. DAP: SPED and MSCS

Mean SD Range 10.0

40-80 DAP:SPED 54.2

MSCS Social Personal Competence Personal Affect.

Achievement Family Physical Total 95.0

95.0

92.3

97.3

99.2

93.6

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

18.8

18.4

17.6

18.3

16.2

14.7

16.3

47-145 28-145 63-145 63-145 72-125 66-141 64-145

Study 3.

DAP: SPED EBPS

Aggression/Conduct disorder Emotional withdrawal/Depression Learning Comp. Disorder Avoidance/Unresponsive Aggressive/Self Destructive Total score -.19

-.22

-.42* -.05

-.02

-.33* Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Study 3. DAP:SPED and MSCS

MSCS Social Personal Competence Personal Affection Achievement Family Physical Total .05

.09

-.11

-.01

-.13

-.03

.01

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Study 4 Children with Learning Disabilities

Normal Ages N Mean SD 9-12 818 13-17 912 50.0

9.4

49.8

9.7

Learning Disabled N Mean SD t-test 78 51 56.5

9.6

54.8

8.8

5.88** 3.60* Note: * p< .05, **p<.01

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Study 4.

DAP: SPED, DAP:QSS, and WISC R

Correlations DAP:QSS DAP:SPED WISC-R

M VIQ PIQ FSIQ DAP: QSS 92.8

100.0

95.5

94.1

SD 9.6

10.1

7.8

14.3

.04

.25** .11

.10

-.05

.04

.45** Note: **p< .01

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Study 5.

Hearing Impaired Students

(Colorado)

Total Sample Gender Males Females Missing Age (in years) 5-12 13& older Missing N=307 142 127 38 136 113 58 Race Hispanic Asian or P. Islander Black 61 8 18 Native American White Other Missing 7 186 19 69 Classroom Placement (52 missing) Full-time/Regular Part time /Special Ed Full time /Special Ed

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

24 94 137

Study 5.

DAP:SPED and the Devereux Behavior Rating Scales--(Ages 5-12 years) Variable Mean SD IP IBF D PSF Total DAP:SPED 56.17

11.46

-.04

-.05

-.11

-.04 -.05

Devereux Scales IP IBF D PSF Total 10.56

10.72

10.77

11.17

3.03

3.06

3.32

3.01

104.48 14.84

.86

.64

.56

.70 .92

.74 .91

.63 .79

.87

Note: P=Interpersonal Problems, BF= Inappropriate Behaviors/Feelings, D=Depression, SF=Physical Symptoms/Fears All correlations between the Devereux Subtests were p<.001

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Study 5. DAP:SPED and Devereux Behavior Rating Scales- Ages 13 -18 Variable Mean SD IP IBF D PSF Total DAP:SPED 50.37

8 -.33* -.31* -.19

-.16 -.30* Devereux Scales IP IBF D PSF Total 11.04

11.22

11.35

11.58

3.06

3.12

3.30

3.20

107.22 14.66

.84

.59

.60

.66 .90

.58 .88

.74 .83

.85

Note: P=Interpersonal Problems, BF= Inappropriate Behaviors/Feelings, D=Depression, SF=Physical Symptoms/Fears All correlations between the Devereux Subtests were p<.001

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Study 5. Present Special Education placement

        

Learning Disabled Speech and Language Impaired Mentally Retarded Seriously Emotionally Disturbed Hard of Hearing/Deaf Orthopedically Handicapped Deaf/Blind Other Health Impaired Other 6 9 8 6 247 4 40 2 3 Special Services



Psychological Counseling/Therapy



Psychiatric Hospitalization/Resid. Treatment 35 2

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Results of DAP: SPED with Hearing Impaired Students

254 Valid Cases/Student Records show 5 as ED Criterion Number Identified Services Provided 55 or less (no need for further evaluation) 55 to 65 (further evaluation is suggested) >65 (Evaluation is strongly indicated) 135 74 45 11 3 2

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

DAP:SPED Recent Dissertations

 Parental stress and children’s drawings  DAP:SPED with hearing Impaired children  Cultural Differences  Navajo children  Research in Greece  Sexually abused  Emotionally Disturbed Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

DAP:SPED & Stress

 Sample of 100 regular education (ages 6-9) students given DAP:SPED whose mothers completed the Parenting Stress Index. There was a significant difference between childrens’ scores of those with mothers under high stress versus low stress. Males scored higher than females.

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

DAP:SPED with Deaf Children

Sample of 39 deaf children (9-12) given DAP:SPED and Meadow-Kendall Social Emotional Inventory for Deaf children and corroboration of emotional disturbance by psychologist. No significant differences were found between the two groups.

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

DAP:SPED with Native American Students

 Sample of 40 Reservation Navajo school aged students who attend public schools. They were administered the DAP:SPED under timed and untimed conditions. Cultural differences in time did not effect the results. No significant differences were found between the groups.

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

DAP:SPED with Greek Children (Politikos, 1998)

 The exact same procedures used in the development of the DAP:SPED were employed using the drawings of a sample of Greek Children.

 There were differences in item performance. Items that did not meet selection criteria in the U.S. norms were deemed necessary for a Greek version.  The DAP:SPED might not be as transportable to other cultures as originally thought Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Drawings of sexually abused children and the DAP:SPED

Impact of rater knowledge on sexually abused and nonabused girl’s scores on the  DAP:SPED. (Chiristi Bruening et.al. 1997, Journal of Personality Assessment).

The DAP:SPED “...is sufficiently objective to withstand the counfounding influence of varying case descriptions”. Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

MACI, Devereux & DAP:SPED and children with ED

Dwors, J. (1996). Differences in normal and seriously emotional disturbed students on the Devereux Behavior Rating Scale-School Form, DAP:SPED and the Millon Adolescent Clinical Inventory. Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Learning the DAP:SPED scoring system

 Training of raters  a one day workshop  competency scoring with 90% accuracy  periodical monitoring of rater performance  final competency using drawings in chapter 5.

 New users  Use chapter 5 Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Administration

 Directions appear in the Record Form  Drawing time for the man, woman, self) is 5 minutes each (max total time = 15 minutes) Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

THE DAP:SPED SCORING SYSTEM

55 items Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

1. Tall Figure

 scored if the distance between the uppermost and the lowermost points of the figure is greater than the height of Line 1 (use the template for the appropriate age).  Articles of clothing such as hats or shoes are included in the measurement, although other objects (e.g. handbag, briefcase, backpack, baseball bat) are not included.  The template must be aligned squarely with the page (not rotated).

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Figure Size

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

2. Short Figure

 scored if the distance between the uppermost point of the figure and the lowermost point of the figure is less than Line 2 (use the template for the appropriate age).  Articles of clothing such as hats or shoes are included in the measurement, although other objects (e.g. handbag, briefcase, backpack, baseball bat) are not included.  In all cases, the template must be aligned squarely with the page (not rotated).

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

3. Big Figure

 is scored if the figure exceeds both the vertical

and

horizontal dimensions of Box 3 (use the template for the appropriate age).  Articles of clothing such as hats or shoes are included in the measurement, although other objects (e.g. handbag, briefcase, backpack, baseball bat) are not included.

 The template must be aligned squarely with the page (not rotated).

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

4. Little Figure

 is scored if the figure fits completely within Box 4 (use the template for the appropriate age).

 Articles of clothing such as hats or shoes are included in the measurement, although other objects (e.g. handbag, briefcase, backpack, baseball bat) are not included.

 The template must be aligned squarely with the page (not rotated).

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

5. Top Placement

 is scored when any part of the figure is in Box 5 and the figure is entirely above Line 5 (use the template for the appropriate age).

 Articles of clothing such as hats or shoes are included in the measurement, although other objects (e.g. handbag, briefcase, backpack, baseball bat) are not included.

 is scored when any part of the figure is in Box 8 and the figure is entirely to the right of Line 8 (use the template for the appropriate age).

 Articles of clothing such as hats or shoes are included in the measurement, although other objects (e.g. handbag, briefcase, backpack, baseball bat) are not included.

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Placement on the Page

Box 5 Line 6 Line 5 Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Box 6 68

6. Bottom Placement

 is scored when any part of the figure is in Box 6 and the figure is entirely below Line 6 (use the template for the appropriate age).

 Articles of clothing such as hats or shoes are included in the measurement, although other objects (e.g. handbag, briefcase, backpack, baseball bat) are not included.

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

7. Left Placement

 is scored when any part of the figure is in Box 7 and the figure is entirely to the left of Line 7 (use the template for the appropriate age).

 Articles of clothing such as hats or shoes are included in the measurement, although other objects (e.g. handbag, briefcase, backpack, baseball bat) are not included.

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

8. Right Placement

 is scored when any part of the figure is in Box 8 and the figure is entirely to the right of Line 8 (use the template for the appropriate age).

 Articles of clothing such as hats or shoes are included in the measurement, although other objects (e.g. handbag, briefcase, backpack, baseball bat) are not included.

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

9. Slanting Figure

 is scored if the vertical axis of the figure (i.e., the line from midpoint of head width to midpoint of stance width) deviates by 15 degrees or more from a perpendicular to the bottom edge of the page (use the Item 9 template).

 Use Scoring Template Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Items 10, 11



10. Legs Together

 is scored if the legs are drawn together with no visible space between legs or if only one leg is visible in profile .

 11.

Baseline Drawn

 is scored if a ground line, grass, etc., is drawn .

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Items 12, 13



12. Lettering/Numbering

 is scored if letters, words, phrases, or numbers appear anywhere on the page

other than

on the figure (on the figure includes worn accessories) 

13. Rotated Page

 is scored if the figure is drawn with the longest dimension of the page on the top (i.e., the folded edge of the Record Form is at the bottom or top instead of on the side.

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Items 14, 15



14. Left/Right-Facing Figure

 is scored if the entire figure or head only is in the left-facing or right-facing profile.



15. Figure Facing Away

 is scored if the entire figure or head only is facing away from the viewer so that only the back of the head is visible.

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

16. Failed Integration

 is scored if any of the following are present but not attached:  head is attached to neck or top of torso  two arms (one if in profile) are attached to the top half of the torso (above the halfway mark in the vertical measurement of the torso or bottom of a dress). The torso extends from the top of the trunk, where it meets the head or neck, to the bottom, where it meets the legs or crotch.

 two legs (one if in profile) are attached at the bottom of the torso (below the halfway mark in the vertical 76

16. Failed Integration

 Arms are attached below the midpoint between the vertical measurement of the torso - so score as 1 Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

17. Transparencies

 is scored if any body part shows through clothing or another body part.

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Items 18, 19



18. Restart

 is scored if one or more human figures are obviously abandoned (erased, scratched out, or merely left incomplete) and a more complete figure appears on the page.

 19. Head Omitted  is scored if the figure’s head is absent. Any attempted representation of a head cannot be scored as an omission.

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Items 20, 21

 20. Hair Omitted  is scored if the figure has no hair on its head. Any attempted representation of hair on head, including beard, etc., cannot be scored as an omission.

 21. Eyes Omitted  is scored if the figure’s eyes are absent. Any attempted representation of eyes (including only one eye) cannot be scored as an omission.

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Items 22, 23, 24



22. Nose Omitted

 is scored if the figure’s nose is absent. Any attempted representation of a nose cannot be scored as an omission. 

23. Mouth Omitted

 is scored if the figure’s mouth is absent. Any attempted representation of a mouth cannot be scored as an omission.



24. Torso Omitted

 is scored if the figure’s torso is absent. Any attempted representation of a torso cannot be scored as an omission .

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Items 25, 26, 27



25. Arms Omitted

  is scored if the figure has no arms. Any attempted representation of arms (including only one arm) cannot be scored as an omission.

26. Fingers Omitted

 is scored if the figure has no fingers. Any attempted representation of fingers cannot be scored as an omission.



27. Legs Omitted

 is scored if the figure has no legs. Any attempted representation of legs (including only one leg) cannot be scored as an omission.

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Items 28, 29

 28. Feet Omitted  is scored if the figure has no feet. Any attempted representation of feet (including only one foot) cannot be scored as an omission.

 29. Crotch Erasure  is scored if erasure is apparent in the area of the figure’s crotch (below the waistline or belt and above the knee area of the leg).

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

30. Crotch Shading

 is scored if pencil strokes are present on the figure’s crotch area (below the waistline or belt and above the knee area of the leg) which fill in an area by coloring or darkening (including stripes or checks on clothing).

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

31. Hand Shading

 is scored if pencil strokes are present on the figure’s hand(s) which fill in an area by coloring or darkening.

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

32. Feet Shading

 is scored if pencil strokes are present on the figure’s feet (foot) which fill in an area by coloring or darkening. (Shoelaces are not scored as shading.) Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

33. Outside Shading

 is scored if pencil strokes are present outside of the figure which fill in an area by coloring or darkening.

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

34. Vacant Eyes

 is scored if both the figure’s eyes (one if in profile) are empty (i.e. open circles).

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Items 35, 36, 37

 35. Closed Eyes  is scored if both the figure’s eyes are closed.

 36. Crossed Eyes  is scored if both the figure’s eyes are crossed.

 37. Gazing Left/Right  is scored if both the figure’s eyes (one if in profile) are gazing toward the rater’s left or right.

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Items 38, 39

 38. Frowning Mouth  is scored if the figure’s mouth is frowning.

 39. Slash Mouth  is scored if the figure’s mouth is a straight line or slash.

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

40. Teeth

 is scored if teeth are present in the figure’s mouth.

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Items 41, 42

 41. Object in Mouth  is scored if an object (cigar, pipe, etc.) is present in the figure’s mouth.

 42. Reaching Arms  is scored if both the figure’s arms (including hands) extend above the top of the figure’s head.

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

43. Pressed to Torso

 is scored if both the figure’s arms are down at the side of figure with no visible space between the torso of the figure and the arms.

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

44. Inconsistent Position

 is scored if each of the figure’s arms is in a different position (i.e., reaching, outstretched, hanging, or pressed to torso, as defined below).

 a reaching arm extends above the figure’s head  an outstretched arm is approximately horizontal  a hanging arm points downward  an arm is pressed to torso if there is no space between it and the torso Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

45. Hands Cut Off

 is scored if there are no hands or fingers at the ends of the arms. (Hands hidden behind back of figure or in pockets not scored.) Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Items 46, 47, 48

 46. Hidden Hands  is scored if the hands are hidden behind the back of the figure or in pockets.

 47. Fists  is scored if the hands are made into fists.

 48. Talons  is scored if one or more fingers are clearly pointed (like a claw) or knife-like.

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

49. Aggressive Symbols

 is scored for the presence of one or more aggressive symbols, gestures, or written statements (e.g., guns, knives, clubs, written profanity, or other symbols of aggression).

“Well, let’s see…So far I’ve got rhythm, I’ve got Music…actually who could ask for anything more?” Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Items 50, 51



50. Object Attached

 is scored for the presence of one or more objects attached to, or being held by, the figure (e.g., handbag, briefcase, backpack, baseball bat, but excluding aggressive symbols and articles such as eyeglasses and jewelry).



51. Background Filled In

 is scored for the presence of anything drawn in addition to the human figure which is not attached to or being held by the figure (e.g., animal, automobile, building, tree, sun, moon, clouds, raindrops).

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

Items 52, 53

 52. Monster  is scored if the figure is drawn as a nonhuman or monster.

 53. Multiple Figures  is scored for the presence of more than one complete person (or monster) on the page.

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

54. Nude Figure

 is scored if a fully or partially unclothed figure is drawn. This item includes any representation of genitalia, for example, but bare feet, short pants, or short sleeve shirt are

not

scored.

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

100

55. Uniformed Figure

 is scored for a figure drawn as a soldier, cowboy/cowgirl, policeman, etc.

 sports figures or cheerleaders are

not

scored.

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

101

DAP:SPED: Interpretation

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

102

DAP:SPED Interpretation

 Use the <55, 55-65, and >65 as a guide  Describe the child’s score as like normal or children with emotional problems Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

103

DAP:SPED Interpretation

Julie’s emotional status was assessed using several different kinds of measures. She earned a T-score of 64 (90% confidence range is 58-70) on the Draw A Person: Screening Procedure for Emotional Disturbance. This score falls at the 92nd percentile, meaning that she had more signs of emotional problems in her drawings than about 92% of the standardization sample. Similarly, she earned very high scores on the Devereux Scales ...

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

104

DAP:SPED Interpretation

 Relate the DAP:SPED scores to other measures of emotional status  Consistency across projective and behavioral rating scale methods is not necessarily expected  An indication of a problem in either type of evaluation system is cause for concern and further examination of the case Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

105

DAP:SPED

1. Tall Figure 3. Big Figure 11. Baseline Drawn 12. Lettering/Numbering 30. Crotch Shading 31. Hand Shading 32. Feet Shading 37. Gazing Eyes 39. Slash Mouth 50. Object Attached TOTAL = 10 (normal mean is 3 points per drawing)

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

106

DAP:SPED Publisher

Pro-Ed

8700 Shoal Creek Boulevard Austin, Texas 78757-6897 (512) 451-3246

Achilles N. Bardos, Ph.D.

107