Diagnostic Drawing Series (DDS)
Reference: Cohen, B.M., S., & Kijak, A.K. (1994). An introduction to the Diagnostic Drawing Series: A standardized tool for the diagnostic and clinical use. Art therapy, 11(2), 105-110.
Purpose: Standardized. Combines research methodology of social sciences with the attention to materials, task, and process of art therapy. Not predicated on one model of verbal psychotherapy. How to get the most info in one session. Employ materials and techniques compatible to art therapy. Reflect the affective and behavioral changes throughout the session.
Ages: Mostly used with adolescents and adults, although there is an additional DDS that addresses children.
Materials: Flat-sided chalk pastels, 18x24” 70lb white drawing paper. Designed to be worked on a table
Administration:
1. “Make a picture using these materials.”
2. “Draw a picture of a tree.”
3. “Make a picture of how you are feeling using line, shape, and colors.”
Inquiry: No specific inquiry. The third drawing serves as a wrap-up.
Interpretation: Interpretation is based on color types/usage, blended colors, idiosyncratic use of color, use of line and shape, integration and abstraction, representation of the image itself (content), enclosures, ground lines, the use of people or animals, inanimate objects, line quality, line length, movement, space usage, how the pastel was used, what type of tree is depicted, placement on page, etc. For specific interpretation, extensive training is needed.
Strengths: Of all the art therapy assessments, the DDS is the most research-based assessment, and many drawings from this assessment have been archived. There is even a protocol that controls for effects of medication. The DDS has a standardized rating system and administration.
Limitations: Evaluators must have extensive and costly training to learn how to score assessments.
Reflection: This assessment feels like the exclusive country club of art therapy assessments in that the training is so costly and time consuming. I doubt that I will use this assessment any time soon! I do give the authors credit for finally figuring out a way to quantify art therapy, and I would like to learn more about the methods in case I ever have the opportunity to conduct research.
Ulman Personality Assessment
Ulman Personality Assessment (UPAP)
Reference: Agell (1989) & Ulman & Dachinger (1975)
Purpose: The UPAP is a projective assessment that provides information about the personality and emotional status of an individual.
Materials: Grey bogus paper, or grey construction paper, 18x24”, Nu pastels (12 assorted hard chalk pastels with full spectrum of color), Drawing board, 24x30” and easel, Masking tape, Stopwatch
Administration:
1. Draw anything you’d like.
2. Exercise big sweeping motions. Then recreate those motions on paper with the chalk pastels.
3. With you eyes closed, draw a large scribble on the paper. Put paper on floor. Ask artist to find object in scribble.
4. Make a picture from the found scribble image.
Taking notes is okay unless it is bothersome to artists. At the same time, examiner must give artist full attention. With much tactfulness, encourage person to not make too much of a tangled scribble. If too much resistance to eyes closed, artist may open eyes. Discreetly, take note of how much time is used.
Inquiry: No specific inquiry is noted.
Interpretation: Put all four drawings up on a wall. The evaluator sits next to the client, facing the drawings. The evaluator asks the client about their associations, ideas, feelings about the individual drawings and the collective series of drawings.
Look at use of color and line quality, and not how easy it is for the person to work abstractly. Is it easy to for him or her to find images in scribble? What is the content of free drawings? Look at whole picture that emerges from the series of drawings.
Strengths: This assessment functions on a kinesthetic level, as well as symbolic, cognitive, and perceptive. It evokes the imagination.
Limitations: Clients may feel uncomfortable making large sweeping motions. This assessment requires a lot of space and relatively unusual materials. Reliability and validity have yet to be determined.
Reflection: I would feel silly making large sweeping motions with my eyes closed, especially if I hadn’t yet established rapport with my therapist. I would like the part about finding a picture in the scribble because it is imaginative and fantasy-based, which is always fun. If I were to administer this assessment, I would probably opt out of the first two steps unless I knew the client felt very comfortable being silly with me.
Reference: Agell (1989) & Ulman & Dachinger (1975)
Purpose: The UPAP is a projective assessment that provides information about the personality and emotional status of an individual.
Materials: Grey bogus paper, or grey construction paper, 18x24”, Nu pastels (12 assorted hard chalk pastels with full spectrum of color), Drawing board, 24x30” and easel, Masking tape, Stopwatch
Administration:
1. Draw anything you’d like.
2. Exercise big sweeping motions. Then recreate those motions on paper with the chalk pastels.
3. With you eyes closed, draw a large scribble on the paper. Put paper on floor. Ask artist to find object in scribble.
4. Make a picture from the found scribble image.
Taking notes is okay unless it is bothersome to artists. At the same time, examiner must give artist full attention. With much tactfulness, encourage person to not make too much of a tangled scribble. If too much resistance to eyes closed, artist may open eyes. Discreetly, take note of how much time is used.
Inquiry: No specific inquiry is noted.
Interpretation: Put all four drawings up on a wall. The evaluator sits next to the client, facing the drawings. The evaluator asks the client about their associations, ideas, feelings about the individual drawings and the collective series of drawings.
Look at use of color and line quality, and not how easy it is for the person to work abstractly. Is it easy to for him or her to find images in scribble? What is the content of free drawings? Look at whole picture that emerges from the series of drawings.
Strengths: This assessment functions on a kinesthetic level, as well as symbolic, cognitive, and perceptive. It evokes the imagination.
Limitations: Clients may feel uncomfortable making large sweeping motions. This assessment requires a lot of space and relatively unusual materials. Reliability and validity have yet to be determined.
Reflection: I would feel silly making large sweeping motions with my eyes closed, especially if I hadn’t yet established rapport with my therapist. I would like the part about finding a picture in the scribble because it is imaginative and fantasy-based, which is always fun. If I were to administer this assessment, I would probably opt out of the first two steps unless I knew the client felt very comfortable being silly with me.
Draw a Person in the Rain
Draw-A-Person-In-The-Rain
References:
Verinis, J.S., Lichtenberg, E.F. & Henrich, L. 1974. The Draw-A-Person in the rain technique: Its relationship to diagnostic category and other personality indicators. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 30, 407-414.
Oster, G.D. & Crone, P.G. 2004. Using drawings in assessment and therapy: A guide for mental health professionals. New York: Brunner-Routledge.
Ages: No age limit is noted.
Purpose: The DAPR is an adapted form of Machover’s Draw-A-Person assessment (1948). The DAPR focuses on a person’s vulnerability, environmental stressors, supports, and coping strategies.
Materials: One 8.5 x 11 piece of blank, white paper, and two #2 graphite pencils with working erasers
Administration: The evaluator hands the paper to the client so that it is vertically-oriented. The evaluator then requests that that the client, “Draw a picture of a person in the rain.” There is no time limit, but the evaluator should remain cognizant of the amount of time the client uses to complete the drawing.
Inquiry: There is no specific post-drawing inquiry. The evaluator may ask the client about the person in the person in the drawing and how he or she is probably feeling. The evaluator could also ask the client to rate his or her stress level on a scale of 1- 10. The evaluator may use this metaphor to talk about the stressors in the client’s life and how he or she feels he or she is coping.
Interpretation: External stress is reflected by the amount and intensity of the rain. The client’s methods of defense are represented by the protective gear, or lack thereof. If no protective gear is drawn, the client may feel that he or she is not coping well with stress.
Strengths: The DAPR assessment offers useful information about the way in which an individual is coping with stressors. It also provides a great metaphor from which to dialogue.
Limitations: This assessment seems limited by its materials restrictions. The drawing also may be affected by the current weather outdoors. Again, this assessment needs more empirical research to support its reliability and validity.
Reflection: This was a fun drawing to complete, but I used color… watercolor pencils, to be exact. I think that this assessment/intervention needs color to further illustrate the emotional content of the pictures. It is really a wonderful metaphor for coping, though.
References:
Verinis, J.S., Lichtenberg, E.F. & Henrich, L. 1974. The Draw-A-Person in the rain technique: Its relationship to diagnostic category and other personality indicators. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 30, 407-414.
Oster, G.D. & Crone, P.G. 2004. Using drawings in assessment and therapy: A guide for mental health professionals. New York: Brunner-Routledge.
Ages: No age limit is noted.
Purpose: The DAPR is an adapted form of Machover’s Draw-A-Person assessment (1948). The DAPR focuses on a person’s vulnerability, environmental stressors, supports, and coping strategies.
Materials: One 8.5 x 11 piece of blank, white paper, and two #2 graphite pencils with working erasers
Administration: The evaluator hands the paper to the client so that it is vertically-oriented. The evaluator then requests that that the client, “Draw a picture of a person in the rain.” There is no time limit, but the evaluator should remain cognizant of the amount of time the client uses to complete the drawing.
Inquiry: There is no specific post-drawing inquiry. The evaluator may ask the client about the person in the person in the drawing and how he or she is probably feeling. The evaluator could also ask the client to rate his or her stress level on a scale of 1- 10. The evaluator may use this metaphor to talk about the stressors in the client’s life and how he or she feels he or she is coping.
Interpretation: External stress is reflected by the amount and intensity of the rain. The client’s methods of defense are represented by the protective gear, or lack thereof. If no protective gear is drawn, the client may feel that he or she is not coping well with stress.
Strengths: The DAPR assessment offers useful information about the way in which an individual is coping with stressors. It also provides a great metaphor from which to dialogue.
Limitations: This assessment seems limited by its materials restrictions. The drawing also may be affected by the current weather outdoors. Again, this assessment needs more empirical research to support its reliability and validity.
Reflection: This was a fun drawing to complete, but I used color… watercolor pencils, to be exact. I think that this assessment/intervention needs color to further illustrate the emotional content of the pictures. It is really a wonderful metaphor for coping, though.
Formal Elements Art Therapy Scale
Formal Elements Art Therapy Scale
Reference:
Gantt, L., & Tabone, C. (1998). The Formal Elements Art Therapy Scale: The rating manual. Morgantown, WV: Gargoyle Press.
Gantt, L., & Tabone, C. (2003). The Formal Elements Art Therapy Scale and “Draw a Person Picking an Apple from a Tree.” In C. Malchiodi (Ed.), Handbook of Art Therapy (pp.420-427). New York: Guilford.
Purpose: FEATS focuses on how people draw, or the process of drawing, rather than the resulting content of the drawing.
Ages: No age limit is noted.
Materials: several sheets of 12 x 18 blank, white drawing paper, “Mr. Sketch” markers (black, brown, yellow, orange, red, purple, magenta, hot pink, turquoise, blue, green, and dark green)
Administration:
There is no time limit. The evaluator hands the client one sheet of paper and instructs the client to, “Draw a person picking an apple from a tree.”
Inquiry: Inquiry is based on an inventory of observations based on the client’s drawing process. Did the client include such things as ladders, red apples, and a whole person? Were colors used? Where is the tree placed on the paper? What is the person’s balance like?
Interpretation:
FEATS is a compilation of 14 different scales including:
Prominence of color
Color fit
Applied energy focus
Space used
Integration: Do the objects fit together and relate to one another?
Logic: Does the picture make sense?
Realism: Is the picture realistic?
Problem-solving: How does the person get the apples?
Normal graphic development
Details
Line quality
Person
Rotation and base line locations: Are any figures existing on a rotated plane?
Perseveration: Does the person continue adding details beyond what is typically expected?
Strengths: This assessment provided a detailed rating manual and pictures illustrating the scales. The populations tested were categorized. The manual’s rating was clearly explained.
Limitations: This assessment needs additional and more complete empirical research, especially with children. Drawing a human figure is challenging and intimidating for some individuals.
Reflection: I enjoyed doing this assessment, but was a little concerned because my little apple-picking boy looked like he was about to fall off the ladder, so I wonder what that might suggest, according to the scoring manual. I liked this task, and would like to administer it to clients.
Reference:
Gantt, L., & Tabone, C. (1998). The Formal Elements Art Therapy Scale: The rating manual. Morgantown, WV: Gargoyle Press.
Gantt, L., & Tabone, C. (2003). The Formal Elements Art Therapy Scale and “Draw a Person Picking an Apple from a Tree.” In C. Malchiodi (Ed.), Handbook of Art Therapy (pp.420-427). New York: Guilford.
Purpose: FEATS focuses on how people draw, or the process of drawing, rather than the resulting content of the drawing.
Ages: No age limit is noted.
Materials: several sheets of 12 x 18 blank, white drawing paper, “Mr. Sketch” markers (black, brown, yellow, orange, red, purple, magenta, hot pink, turquoise, blue, green, and dark green)
Administration:
There is no time limit. The evaluator hands the client one sheet of paper and instructs the client to, “Draw a person picking an apple from a tree.”
Inquiry: Inquiry is based on an inventory of observations based on the client’s drawing process. Did the client include such things as ladders, red apples, and a whole person? Were colors used? Where is the tree placed on the paper? What is the person’s balance like?
Interpretation:
FEATS is a compilation of 14 different scales including:
Prominence of color
Color fit
Applied energy focus
Space used
Integration: Do the objects fit together and relate to one another?
Logic: Does the picture make sense?
Realism: Is the picture realistic?
Problem-solving: How does the person get the apples?
Normal graphic development
Details
Line quality
Person
Rotation and base line locations: Are any figures existing on a rotated plane?
Perseveration: Does the person continue adding details beyond what is typically expected?
Strengths: This assessment provided a detailed rating manual and pictures illustrating the scales. The populations tested were categorized. The manual’s rating was clearly explained.
Limitations: This assessment needs additional and more complete empirical research, especially with children. Drawing a human figure is challenging and intimidating for some individuals.
Reflection: I enjoyed doing this assessment, but was a little concerned because my little apple-picking boy looked like he was about to fall off the ladder, so I wonder what that might suggest, according to the scoring manual. I liked this task, and would like to administer it to clients.
Family Centerd Circle Drawings
Family-Centered-Circle-Drawings
Reference:
Burns, R.C. (1990). A guide to family-centered circle drawings. Brunner/ Mazel Publishers: New York.
Brooke, S.L. (2004). Tools of the trade: a therapist’s guide to art therapy assessments. Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas Publisher, LTD.
Purpose: This assessment uses the interpretative quality of mandalas to explore the parent-self relationship
Ages: No age limit is noted.
Materials: several 8 ½” x 11” white, sheets of paper with circles 7 ½” x 9” drawn, lead pencil, crayons, colored pencils, chalks, markers, etc.
Administration: The evaluator hands the client a piece of paper and drawing utensils, while stating, “Draw your mother in the center of the circle. Visually free associate with drawn symbols around the periphery of the circle. Try to draw a whole person, not just a stick figure or a cartoon.” These essential directions are repeated three more times, substituting “father,” “self,” and “parents,” for “mother.” These instructions should yield four separate drawings on four separate pieces of paper.
Inquiry: This assessment has no specific inquiry questions.
Interpretation:
The evaluator should look for size of the figures and omissions or overemphasis on body parts.
The evaluator should also take notice of the facial expressions, which may indicate the emotions of the figure or the client’s perception of his or her environment.
The evaluator should also consider the symbols depicted. Are they positive or negative?
Where are the symbols depicted in relation to concepts of mandala analysis?
Overall, the pictures should reflect the way in which a client perceives his or her mother, father, self, and parents.
Strengths: This assessment offers useful information about a client’s relationship to his parental figures. It capitalizes on the theories of mandala analysis to provide another element of interpretation.
Limitations: This assessment has limited empirical evidence, and the mandala component can be slightly confusing without a lot of knowledge on the subject. Drawing a human figure can be intimidating, and symbols may often appear as clichéd.
Reflection: This drawing was hard for me to draw because I didn’t want to accidentally depict my mother, who is the most dear person in the universe to me, unfavorably! There isn’t much metaphor here. Even a person with no knowledge of art therapy can predict the intended focus of this drawing exercise, which could almost be considered a confounding variable if the evaluator is attempting to get an accurate depiction of the client’s perception of his or her mother, father, self, or parents.
with parents.
Reference:
Burns, R.C. (1990). A guide to family-centered circle drawings. Brunner/ Mazel Publishers: New York.
Brooke, S.L. (2004). Tools of the trade: a therapist’s guide to art therapy assessments. Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas Publisher, LTD.
Purpose: This assessment uses the interpretative quality of mandalas to explore the parent-self relationship
Ages: No age limit is noted.
Materials: several 8 ½” x 11” white, sheets of paper with circles 7 ½” x 9” drawn, lead pencil, crayons, colored pencils, chalks, markers, etc.
Administration: The evaluator hands the client a piece of paper and drawing utensils, while stating, “Draw your mother in the center of the circle. Visually free associate with drawn symbols around the periphery of the circle. Try to draw a whole person, not just a stick figure or a cartoon.” These essential directions are repeated three more times, substituting “father,” “self,” and “parents,” for “mother.” These instructions should yield four separate drawings on four separate pieces of paper.
Inquiry: This assessment has no specific inquiry questions.
Interpretation:
The evaluator should look for size of the figures and omissions or overemphasis on body parts.
The evaluator should also take notice of the facial expressions, which may indicate the emotions of the figure or the client’s perception of his or her environment.
The evaluator should also consider the symbols depicted. Are they positive or negative?
Where are the symbols depicted in relation to concepts of mandala analysis?
Overall, the pictures should reflect the way in which a client perceives his or her mother, father, self, and parents.
Strengths: This assessment offers useful information about a client’s relationship to his parental figures. It capitalizes on the theories of mandala analysis to provide another element of interpretation.
Limitations: This assessment has limited empirical evidence, and the mandala component can be slightly confusing without a lot of knowledge on the subject. Drawing a human figure can be intimidating, and symbols may often appear as clichéd.
Reflection: This drawing was hard for me to draw because I didn’t want to accidentally depict my mother, who is the most dear person in the universe to me, unfavorably! There isn’t much metaphor here. Even a person with no knowledge of art therapy can predict the intended focus of this drawing exercise, which could almost be considered a confounding variable if the evaluator is attempting to get an accurate depiction of the client’s perception of his or her mother, father, self, or parents.
with parents.
Stimulus Drawing
Stimulus Drawing
Reference: Silver, R. (1991). Stimulus Drawings and Techniques in Therapy, Development, and Assessment. Ablin Press Distributors.
Purpose: Stimulus Drawings were developed for use with deaf children, and were later expanded to include learning-disabled individuals, stroke survivors, and other communication difficulties. Stimulus drawings are used to gain insight into the emotions, cognitions, and developmental maturity of individuals. They may also give information regarding problem solving, fantasy, and access to imagination. The Stimulus Drawings include 50 line drawings of people, animals, places, and things presented on 3" x 5" cards. They may be used as a therapeutic technique, a developmental technique, or as an assessment technique.
Ages: Ages 5+
Materials: 8 ½ x 11 drawing paper, colored chalk, markers, crayons
Administration: The evaluator requests that the client pick out 2 or 3 stimulus cards. The client is then asked to tell and illustrate a story using those cards. After the initial story and drawing have been completed, the client is asked to do a free drawing, or a response drawing, that also tells a story.
Inquiry: No specific inquiry is included.
Interpretation: As an assessment, Stimulus Drawings looks at the cards chosen, the drawing, and the story that follows. The evaluator considers emotional content, developmental functioning, problem solving, and access to imagination.
Strengths: This assessment focuses on creative thinking, imagination, and ability to problem solve. It may be perceived as enjoyable and non-threatening. The cards are relatively poor artistic renderings, which may alleviate some of the pressure to create masterful images.
Limitations: Stimulus Drawings need additional empirical evidence. Some argue that the poor artistic rendering makes this assessment seem nonprofessional or invalid.
Reflection: This is my idea of a fun game night in my kitchen! I think it has more potential as an art therapy intervention than as an assessment, but that may be because I do not have the appropriate manual, which would elucidate some of my confusion about the assessment’s interpretation.
Reference: Silver, R. (1991). Stimulus Drawings and Techniques in Therapy, Development, and Assessment. Ablin Press Distributors.
Purpose: Stimulus Drawings were developed for use with deaf children, and were later expanded to include learning-disabled individuals, stroke survivors, and other communication difficulties. Stimulus drawings are used to gain insight into the emotions, cognitions, and developmental maturity of individuals. They may also give information regarding problem solving, fantasy, and access to imagination. The Stimulus Drawings include 50 line drawings of people, animals, places, and things presented on 3" x 5" cards. They may be used as a therapeutic technique, a developmental technique, or as an assessment technique.
Ages: Ages 5+
Materials: 8 ½ x 11 drawing paper, colored chalk, markers, crayons
Administration: The evaluator requests that the client pick out 2 or 3 stimulus cards. The client is then asked to tell and illustrate a story using those cards. After the initial story and drawing have been completed, the client is asked to do a free drawing, or a response drawing, that also tells a story.
Inquiry: No specific inquiry is included.
Interpretation: As an assessment, Stimulus Drawings looks at the cards chosen, the drawing, and the story that follows. The evaluator considers emotional content, developmental functioning, problem solving, and access to imagination.
Strengths: This assessment focuses on creative thinking, imagination, and ability to problem solve. It may be perceived as enjoyable and non-threatening. The cards are relatively poor artistic renderings, which may alleviate some of the pressure to create masterful images.
Limitations: Stimulus Drawings need additional empirical evidence. Some argue that the poor artistic rendering makes this assessment seem nonprofessional or invalid.
Reflection: This is my idea of a fun game night in my kitchen! I think it has more potential as an art therapy intervention than as an assessment, but that may be because I do not have the appropriate manual, which would elucidate some of my confusion about the assessment’s interpretation.
Magazine Photo Collage
Magazine Photo Collage (MPC)
Reference: Landgarten, H.B. (1993). Magazine Photo Collage. New York, NY: Brunner Mazel Publishers.
Purpose: This assessment is designed to unveil conflicts, defense mechanisms, and styles of functioning.
Ages: No age limit is noted.
Materials: 4 sheets 16x20” paper, 2 boxes of precut images: one of people; one of miscellaneous items; liquid glue, glue stick, scissors, pencil, pen, black marker
Tips for creating image boxes: Use only images, no words. Avoid neatness of everything being cut out. Have a wide variety of images. It is ideal to have many images reflect the culture of the client. Look for realistic images (not too glam). Include male and female figures of all ages. Look for figures indicating movement. Try to find images representing all economic levels. Include single people, families, groups, and dyads. Have some images with eyes or ears cut away. Try to find black and white and color photos. In the miscellaneous box provide a large variety of images. The boxes may be “stacked” with images that may be relevant to person’s treatment goals, i.e. alcohol, suicide, abusive images, fire setting, divorce.
Administration: The administration of the MPC involves a four task protocol. It is helpful have all of the materials laying out when the client enters.
Task I: Task I has the least instructions, thus establishing few boundaries. “Look through the box of miscellaneous items and pick out pictures that catch your attention and paste them on the picture (liquid glue). Write directly on the page anything that you associate with the items.”
Task II. Second sheet of paper: “Pick out 4, 5, or 6 pictures of people, and glue (glue stick) them on the page. Write or tell me what you imagine each person is thinking and saying.”
Task III. Pick out 4, 5, or 6 images from the people or misc. box that stand for something good or something bad and glue (glue stick) them down. Write or tell me about these items.”
Task IV. Pick out only 1 picture from the people box and glue (glue stick) it down. Write down or tell me what is happening to that person. Do you think the situation will change? If yes, then find a picture that illustrates the change, or to tell you what will make it change.
Interpretation:
Task I considerations: How did person handle the images? Were the images torn, trimmed, or left in original state before being pasted down? How was the glue handled? How was the placement (carefully, haphazardly)? What was the overall gist of pictorial content (theme or scattered)? Was there a specific message that appeared?
Task II considerations: Is the person able to follow directions? How does the client perceive trust? The number of pictures selected is important only if the next two tasks produce the same response.
Task III considerations: What does the person consider good or bad? Does the person use only people? Only things? Combination?
Task IV considerations: Does the person’s outlook seem positive or negative? How do he/she problem solve?
Strengths: Client exercises control over the assessment because he/she selects his/her own collage images. This assessment is less-threatening than many other assessments because no artistic ability is needed. This assessment is not culturally bound if the image boxes come from a diverse selection of magazines. MPC can be a meaningful tool in revealing problem areas.
Limitations: The MPC is not empirically based. Also, the MPC requires a great amount of preparation time in order to keep image boxes appropriately stocked with diverse images. It would also be difficult to complete this assessment in one session.
Content, pictorial elements and thematic evidence,
Reflection: Despite this assessment appearing to be a lot of prep-work for the evaluator, it seems great. I understand why we didn’t try it in class, but I would be interested in experiencing this assessment as the artist. It is very creative and allows the artist a lot of control, even though it is highly structured. I anticipate using this assessment as an art therapist, and have already started on my image boxes!
Reference: Landgarten, H.B. (1993). Magazine Photo Collage. New York, NY: Brunner Mazel Publishers.
Purpose: This assessment is designed to unveil conflicts, defense mechanisms, and styles of functioning.
Ages: No age limit is noted.
Materials: 4 sheets 16x20” paper, 2 boxes of precut images: one of people; one of miscellaneous items; liquid glue, glue stick, scissors, pencil, pen, black marker
Tips for creating image boxes: Use only images, no words. Avoid neatness of everything being cut out. Have a wide variety of images. It is ideal to have many images reflect the culture of the client. Look for realistic images (not too glam). Include male and female figures of all ages. Look for figures indicating movement. Try to find images representing all economic levels. Include single people, families, groups, and dyads. Have some images with eyes or ears cut away. Try to find black and white and color photos. In the miscellaneous box provide a large variety of images. The boxes may be “stacked” with images that may be relevant to person’s treatment goals, i.e. alcohol, suicide, abusive images, fire setting, divorce.
Administration: The administration of the MPC involves a four task protocol. It is helpful have all of the materials laying out when the client enters.
Task I: Task I has the least instructions, thus establishing few boundaries. “Look through the box of miscellaneous items and pick out pictures that catch your attention and paste them on the picture (liquid glue). Write directly on the page anything that you associate with the items.”
Task II. Second sheet of paper: “Pick out 4, 5, or 6 pictures of people, and glue (glue stick) them on the page. Write or tell me what you imagine each person is thinking and saying.”
Task III. Pick out 4, 5, or 6 images from the people or misc. box that stand for something good or something bad and glue (glue stick) them down. Write or tell me about these items.”
Task IV. Pick out only 1 picture from the people box and glue (glue stick) it down. Write down or tell me what is happening to that person. Do you think the situation will change? If yes, then find a picture that illustrates the change, or to tell you what will make it change.
Interpretation:
Task I considerations: How did person handle the images? Were the images torn, trimmed, or left in original state before being pasted down? How was the glue handled? How was the placement (carefully, haphazardly)? What was the overall gist of pictorial content (theme or scattered)? Was there a specific message that appeared?
Task II considerations: Is the person able to follow directions? How does the client perceive trust? The number of pictures selected is important only if the next two tasks produce the same response.
Task III considerations: What does the person consider good or bad? Does the person use only people? Only things? Combination?
Task IV considerations: Does the person’s outlook seem positive or negative? How do he/she problem solve?
Strengths: Client exercises control over the assessment because he/she selects his/her own collage images. This assessment is less-threatening than many other assessments because no artistic ability is needed. This assessment is not culturally bound if the image boxes come from a diverse selection of magazines. MPC can be a meaningful tool in revealing problem areas.
Limitations: The MPC is not empirically based. Also, the MPC requires a great amount of preparation time in order to keep image boxes appropriately stocked with diverse images. It would also be difficult to complete this assessment in one session.
Content, pictorial elements and thematic evidence,
Reflection: Despite this assessment appearing to be a lot of prep-work for the evaluator, it seems great. I understand why we didn’t try it in class, but I would be interested in experiencing this assessment as the artist. It is very creative and allows the artist a lot of control, even though it is highly structured. I anticipate using this assessment as an art therapist, and have already started on my image boxes!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)