Psychological Reporfc, 1990, 67, 1136-1138.

O Psychological Reports

1990

COMPUTER PROJECTIVE DRAWINGS O F JUVENILE OFFENDERS AND COLLEGE FRESHMEN ' GEORGETTE K. MAROLDO Texas Lutheran College Szmzmary.-This study examined the willingness of two diverse groups, 26 junvenile offenders (21 boys, 5 girls) and 26 first-semester college freshmen (12 men and 14 women) to draw on a personal computer. The purpose was to see whether there were differences in what they chose to draw, i.e., themselves (SELF), family (FAMILY), other (OTHER). The analyses indicated no significant differences between the groups in content of drawing.

Projective or expressive drawings and art therapy may be combined in the diagnosis and treatment of psychological disorders. The fundamental difference (Naumberg, 1980) between projective drawings obtained in psychological tests and those produced in art therapy is that test designs are essentially prompted and those in art therapy are usually spontaneous. In any case, Sheniak (1981) believes that art serves as a meeting- ground for the inner and outer worlds of perception. Psychiatric patients frequently express themselves through graphic means more easily than verbally. Self-concept, significant others, and situational stress are often reflected in such drawings (Hammer, 1980). Psychologists employing projective drawing techniques and art therapists, respectively, have used paper-and-pencil, crayons, watercolor, acrylic, and almost all other media. With the advent of the computer, a new dimension is added, and perhaps another means through which individuals can express themselves nonverbally. The advantages of the computer are numerous. They save time, minimize messes, store drawings on the disk, and can print several drawings rapidly (Maroldo, 1989). According to Canter (1989), whether computers can enhance art therapy and [projective or expressive drawing] techniques depends on our innate curiosity as artists to explore and investiage new procedures. -

METHOD This brief study examined two separate groups. The purpose was simply to see if these diverse groups, juvenile offenders, and first-semester college freshmen (offenders and nonoffenders) would readily draw on the computer, since much has been written about computerphobia (Bloom, 1985; Schwartz, 1978). Further, this study examined what each group would draw given 'The author thanks Grace Aguirre and Jay Koger for their assistance in this study. Address correspondence to Dr. Georgette K Maroldo, Department of Psychology, Texas Luther College, 1000 West Court Street, Seguin, TX 78155.

1137

COMPUTER PROJECTIVE DRAWINGS

three choices of topic. I n other words, would offenders draw more or less of one topic than college students and/or vice versa. The first group of subjects were 2 1 boys and 5 girls who were detained or on probation at the Guadalupe County Juvenile Probation Department in Seguin, Texas. These subjects ranged in age from 10 to 17 yr. College freshmen were between 18 and 19 yr. I n this group there were 12 men and 14 women. The MAC Plus computer was set up at the Probation department, where the probation officers selected the subjects for that day. Later, the computer was brought back to campus. All subjects were instructed to draw either a picture of themselves (SELF), family (FAMILY), or anything they wish (OTHER).

Table 1 shows the frequency, percentage, correlations, and analysis of variance of computer drawing choices for men, women, total juvenile offenders, and college freshmen. TABLE 1 FREQUENCY, PERCENTAGE, CORRELATION, A N D ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF CONTENT CHOICESrm COMPUTERDRAWING BY M m s , F ~ A L E S TOTAL , AND COLLEGE FRESHMEN JUVENILEOFFENDERS, Group

Content of Drawings Family Other

n

Self

%

f

Juvenile Offenders 3 Boys 21 14 Girls 5 20 1 Total 26 15 4 College Freshmen Men 12 58 7 Women 14 36 5 Total 26 46 12 Juvenile Offenders and College Freshmen 3 21 14 Boys Men 12 58 7 Total 33 30 10 Juvenile Offenders and College Freshmen Girls 5 20 Women 14 36 Total 19 32 Juvenile Offenders and College Freshmen 33 Male Female 19 Total 52

1 5 6

F

P

r

f

f

f

f

10 20 12

2 1 3

76 60 73

16 3 19

0 21 12

0 3 3

42 43 42

5 6 11

-.292

10 0 6

2 0 2

76 42 64

16 5 21

-.I33

20 21 21

1 3 4

60 43 47

3 6 9

,463

,313

.18 .68 .49 .53 2.35 .14

1138

G. K.MAROLDO

Boys, who were juvenile offenders drew more Other, and college men (freshmen) drew more Self, but the difference was not significant. I n fact, no related statistic showed significance in any connection. However, six offenders who stated that they wanted to draw Other, drew houses. Drawing a house is a common response which sometimes represents Self. O n the other hand, it could be that a house is where the family lives. College students, who are older, may have grown away from family, while younger juvenile counterparts may long for security and family life as they would like it to be. Only two college students drew houses for Other. One male offender drew the head of a unicorn with a tear in its eye, and a college student drew her pet dog. The quality of drawings on the computer by the groups appeared to be equivalent, and only two stick figures were drawn by either group. Line drawings on the computer appeared to be easily interpreted and should be investigated further, especially for their use with color. O n the whole, although the juvenile offenders were younger, there appeared to be little difference between them and college students in what they chose to draw given three choices on the computer. This study suggests further investigation into the use of computers in projective drawings or art therapy. REFERENCES BLOOM, A. J. (1985) An anxiety management approach to computerphobia. fiaining and Development lournal, January, 90-94. CANTER,D. S. (1989) Art therapy and computers. In H. Wadeson, J. Durkin, & D. Perack (Eds.), Advances in art therapy. New York, NY: Wiey. Pp. 296-316. HAMMER,E. F. (1980) Projection in the art studio. In E. F. Hammer (Ed.), The clinical appfication of projective drawings. Springfield, IL: Thomas. Pp. 5-17. IMAROLDO, G. K. (1989) Advantages of the computer in art psychotherapy. Paper presented at the 97th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, New Orleans, LA, August 15, 1989. NAUMBERG, M. (1980) Art therapy: its scope and function. In E. F. Hammer (Ed.), The clinical application ofprojective drawings. Springfield, IL: Thomas. Pp. 511-561. SCHWARTZ,M. D. (1978) Why do psychiatrists avoid using the CRT? Computers in Psychiatry/Pzychologv, 1(4), 10. SHEW, D. (1981) Art as therapy. School Arts, November, 53-55.

Accepted December 3, 1990.

Computer projective drawings of juvenile offenders and college freshmen.

This study examined the willingness of two diverse groups, 26 juvenile offenders (21 boys, 5 girls) and 26 first-semester college freshmen (12 men and...
101KB Sizes 0 Downloads 0 Views