Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Journal of Personality Assessment: To Cite This Article: Stanley S. Marzolf & John H. Kirchner (1972) House-Tree-Person
Journal of Personality Assessment: To Cite This Article: Stanley S. Marzolf & John H. Kirchner (1972) House-Tree-Person
Journal of Personality
Assessment
Publication details, including instructions for
authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/hjpa20
House-Tree-Person Drawings
and Personality Traits
a b
Stanley S. Marzolf & John H. Kirchner
a
Illinois State University , USA
b
Wood County Mental Health Clinic , USA
Published online: 16 Nov 2010.
To cite this article: Stanley S. Marzolf & John H. Kirchner (1972) House-Tree-Person
Drawings and Personality Traits, Journal of Personality Assessment, 36:2, 148-165,
DOI: 10.1080/00223891.1972.10119740
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the
information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.
However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,
or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views
expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and
are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the
Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with
primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any
losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,
and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or
indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the
Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.
Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,
sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is
expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Downloaded by [New York University] at 00:25 11 June 2015
House-Tree-PersonDrawings and Personality Traits
STANLEY S. MARZOLF JOHN H. KIRCHNER'
Illinois State University and Wood County Mental Health Clinic
SummTy: House-Tree-Person (HTP) drawings and Sixteen Personality Factor Question-
naire (16PF) scores were obtained from 760 college men and women. Presence or absence of
108 drawing Characteristics was compared with 16PF scores. Drawings judged indicative of
personality disturbance were compared with the remainder. A number of significant but low
correlations were found between characteristics and traits but little difference was found
between the drawings supposedly indicative of disturbance and the remaining drawings.
Marked sex differences in characteristic-trait relationships was the most notable finding.
The House-Tree-Person (HTP) projec- cludes an experimental scale, Motivation-
tive test, one of the most commonly used al Deviation (MD), which is intended to
Downloaded by [New York University] at 00:25 11 June 2015
diagnostic instruments (Lubin, Wallis, & indicate the degree to which respondents
Paine, 1971), presumably reveals aspects seek to protect their self-concept. Thus a
of personality either through specific total of 17 traits was included. The Form
drawing characteristics, overall appear- C vocabulary is such as to permit use of
ance of the drawings, or both (Buck, the questionnaire at a wide range of edu-
1948). Principal support for the validity cational levels; replication in other sam-
of this assumption has been almost exclu- ples is thus facilitated.
sively based on clinical data. In a college From the publications of Buck (1948,
population Johnson's (1971) study corre- 1950, 1964) and Jolles (1964) and our
lating upper left-hand placement of the inspection of HTP drawings for additional
human figure in the Draw-a-Person with characteristics, a list of 108 characteris-
the IPAT anxiety scale was the only re- tics was prepared. This list included 73
lated research found in the literature. The characteristics used in previous studies
p a u c i t y o f psychometric evidence (Marzolf & Kirchner, 1970, 1971), and
prompted this investigation of the rela- consisted of 33 house, 28 tree, and 47
tionship between HTP characteristics and person items. To facilitate reading the
measured personality traits. tables each characteristic was numbered
and the number, in parentheses, accompa-
Method nies each reference to it. All drawings
HTP drawings were obtained from 306 were inspected for the presence or ab-
men and 454 women enrolled in under- sence of the characteristics. As had previ-
graduate psychology courses, none of ously been done for the first 73 charac-
which courses was required. On the same teristics, the objectivity of the 35 addi-
day or within a few weeks thereafter tional ones was evaluated by observing
these students were given the Sixteen Per- the degree to which two assistants agreed
sonality Factor Questionnaire, Form C in their judgments of 50 drawings chosen
(16PF) (Cattell, 1962). This form in- at random. The two judges agreed com-
pletely in their judgment of 20 character-
1 The data were obtained through the coopera- istics but in one, House above the hori-
tion of our colleagues Drs. Valjean Cashen, zontal midline (77) there was only 86%
William Gnagey, Robert Hogan, Frank Holmes,
Irving Jacks, Stanley Murrell, and Walter agreement; the 14% difference was reli-
Vernon. The hospital data were gathered with able at the .004 level. Nude person (102)
the assistance of the following members of the
Peoria State Hospital Psychology Department: produced a difference of 10% between
Jerome Yalowitz, Dr. Howard Birkey, Glen the two. All other characteristics were
Gerber, Robert Lane, Mrs. Kit Lowder, James
Mezzelle, Mrs. Susie Welch, Richard Wolff, and agreed upon in better than 90% of the
Arthur Zetterberg. Drs. Murrell and Hogan were drawings; the median percent was 98.2.
especially helpful in assisting Dr. Kirchner in In addition to the data regarding the
judging the drawings for manifestation of per-
sonality disturbance. presence or absence of drawing character-
STANLEY S. MARZOLF and JOHN H. KIRCHNER 149
istics, judgments of the significance of the showed reliable sex differences and 28.5%
drawing as a whole were obtained from of the additional 35 did so. Thus 36.1%
three experienced clinicians who selected of the 108 drawing characteristics showed
those drawings which they considered in- reliable sex differences in incidence (p <
dicative of some degree of personality dis- .05).
turbance. Inspection of the drawings by Predicting Traits
these judges took place on several occa- From Characteristics
sions so that only about 100 drawings
were viewed on any one occasion. The hypothesis that presence or ab-
The extent to which drawing features sence of drawing characteristics is related
are related to personality traits was in- to 16PF scores was first tested by com-
vestigated by computing the point biserial puting the point biserial r between each
r between each of the 108 characteristics of the 108 drawing attributes and each of
and each of the 16PF traits, computing the 17 16PF scores, separately by sex.
For men there were 135 correlations sig-
Downloaded by [New York University] at 00:25 11 June 2015
who did not. In other words, those who sive, or Experimenting were each more
were not defensive were more likely to likely to show Person’s hands behind
draw a large tree. By contrast, women back (52). Happy-go-lucky, Venturesome,
who were defensive were more likely to Experimenting, or Relaxed men were
draw a small person. Men who were de- each more likely to show Profile faces left
fensive were more likely to draw a tree or (67). Finally, Sober, Practical, or Forth-
shrubs by the house. The other correla- right men and Conscientious women were
tions may be interpreted in a similar man- each more likely than not to have draw-
ner. ings in which Person is the same sex (70).
Notably more correlations between Accuracy of prediction of attributes
traits and characteristics are shown for from measurements depends not only on
women than for men. This does not jus- the magnitude of the point biserial r but
tify a conclusion that there are sex differ- also upon the incidence of the attribute,
ences in correlation between traits and i.e. the base rate. When rs are large, pre-
drawing characteristics. The number of diction is relatively more dependent upon
women was 48% greater than the number the value of the continuous variable, but
of men so that in case of Large tree (2), when rs are low, as was the case in these
cited above, all other things being equal, data, accuracy of prediction is more de-
the r for men would have had to be -.13 pendent upon the incidence of the attri-
rather than -.11 in order to be significant bute. Improvement in prediction over
at the .02 level. Since we do not know what would be possible on the basis of
that all things would have been equal had incidence alone will increase as the inci-
there been as many men as women, our dence approaches 0.5. Since many of the
data neither support nor deny the possi- drawing attributes were either rarely pres-
bility of sex differences in the number of ent or rarely absent, knowledge of 16PF
drawing features related t o 16PF traits. score would rarely have been helpful
However, if Table 1 had included all the (Guilford, 1965, pp. 380 ff).
rs for men significant at the .05 level,
only six of the additional ones would Trait Score
have involved characteristics already in- and Differential Incidence
cluded for women. Though there may be The possibility that the presence of a
no sex difference in the number of signifi- drawing characteristic is associated with
having either a high or low trait score
2 Tables corresponding to these but including rather than a moderate score or with hav-
data significant at least at the . 0 5 level have
been deposited with the National Auxiliary ing a moderate score rather than one at
Publication Service o f the American Society for either extreme was investigated by noting
Information Science. Order Document No.
01669 c/c CCM Information Sciences, Inc., 909 differential incidence associated with trait
3rd Avenue, New York, N. Y., 10022. Remit in scores. Each of the 16PF distributions
advance $5.00 for photocopies or $2.00 for
microfilm and make checks payable to: CCMIC was divided into low, middle, and high
NAPS. portions, as near thirds of the distribu-
STANLEY S . MARZOLF and JOHN H. KIRCHNER 151
Table 1
H-T-P Characteristics Correlated with 16 PF Traits
(Only relations shown are those wherep G.02)
Men Women
Characteristics and Traits
Pa P P r
-
MD Not defensive Defensivec
2 Large tree 55.1 -.11*
4 Small house 12.2 .11
6 Small person 16.4 .14**
Downloaded by [New York University] at 00:25 11 June 2015
Men Women
CharacteristicSand Traits
Pa P P r
G Expedient - Comcientious
2 Large tree 33.0 .14*
12 Person sideways or upside down .7 -.12*
15 Person geometrically centered 3.3 -.lo
34 House picture includes people 1.3 -.lo
50 Person has cads) 35.6 -.18**
Downloaded by [New York University] at 00:25 11 June 2015
Men Women
Characteristics and Traits
Pa rb P r
-
M Practical Imaginative
7 Shading of house 64.1 -12
44 Tree branches droop 4.6 -16""
52 Person's hands behind back 9.5 -.14**
59 Person has hair on face 3.1 .11
65 Person is a child 10.6 -.lo
70 Person is the same sex 84.3 -.14*
Downloaded by [New York University] at 00:25 11 June 2015
Men Women
Characteristicsand Traits
F rb P r
tions as the shape of the distributions and dle range on this trait; for women a Large
the fact of integer class intervals permit- person (3) was more likely to appear in
ted. C h squares were computed from the the drawings of those who were either
obtained and expected frequencies among Practical or Imaginative rather than in be-
the drawings of those in each of these tween. In some instances only those at
portions. In Table 2 results significant at one extreme showed the characteristic:
least at the .02 level are presented. only those who were Relaxed drew a
No characteristic showed a differential Special kind of house (31). No woman
incidence with respect t o the same 16PF who was Tense drew a swing attached to
trait for both men and women. It is es- the tree (100) and the rare feature, Tree
pecially noteworthy that the expectation in the upper left quadrant (87), was
that non-linear relationships existed was drawn only by those women who were in
borne out in several instances. For exam- the upper third of the Practical - Imagin-
ple both Sober and Happy-go-lucky men ative scale. Buck states (1966, p. 108)
were more likely to draw a Large house that this quadrant represents lack of con-
(1) than were those who were in the mid- ceptual maturation. Insofar as imagina-
STANLEY S. MARZOLF and JOHN H. KIRCHNER 155
Table 2
Differential Incidence of H-T-P Characteristics in
Low, Middle, High Portions of 16PF Distributions
(Only relations shown are those wherep .02) <
Incidence
-
A Reserved Outgoing
6 Small person 8.4 15.4 25.8
44 Tree branches droop 0.0 3.0 9.8"
80 House left of vertical
midline 4.0 0.0 0.6"
C Affected by Feelings -
Emotionally stable
28 Flowers by house 1.5 3.0 16.9""
52 Person's hands behind back 10.4 0.6 8.5""
-
F Sober Happy-go-lucky
1 Large House 17.1 6.1 16.9
18 Person has ground line 5.7 5.1 13.3
34 House picture includes people 1.1 0.1 3.9 "
59 Person has hair on face 8.O 1.7 2.3
67 Profile facing left 7.9 22.4 27.7
G Expedient - Conscientious
44 Tree branches droop 11.4 3.2 0.0"
50 Person has ears 51.6 35.2 20.0
66 Person is an historical
figure 8.1 0.6 0.0""
H Shy - Venturesome
67 Profile facing left 11.7 19.0 36.6
83 House right of vertical
midline 4.3 0.6 0.0
92 House paper topped 4.3 0.3 0.0""
M Practical - Imaginative
3 Large person 19.7 10.1 28.0""
52 Person's hands
behind back 21.2 7.7 6.0""
59 Person has hair on face 16.8 4.3 9.5
87 Tree in upper left
quadrant 0.0 0.0 2.0
N Forthright - Shrewd
14 Tree geometrically centered 1.1 1.8 7.3
20 House has oval window 17.8 6.8 14.6"
71 Female breast area
marked 0.0 3.6 12.5"
91 Person paper based 11.1 3.9 11.0
156 House-Tree-PersonDrawings and Personality Traits
Table 2 - Continued
~~~
Incidence
I
Trait and Characteristics
0 Placid - Apprehensive
k High
15 Person geometrically
centered 1.1
16 House has ground line 23.1 **
Downloaded by [New York University] at 00:25 11 June 2015
Table 3
Functions Discriminating Those Whose Drawings Showed a Characteristic
from Those Whose Drawings Did Not
(Only relations shown are those wherep G.02)
I
Means
Characteristic and Traits ifferenci Rb
Men
15 Person geometrically centered (2.3)' .218**
0 Placid - Apprehensive 2.24 .792
Q2 Group dependent - Self-sufficient 1.08 .207
17 Tree has ground line (48.7) .180*
H Shy - Venturesome .51 -338
I Tough-minded - Tender-minded -.73 562
28 Flowers by house (5.9) .211*
MD Not defensive - Defensive 1.10 .130
STANLEY S. MARZOLF and JOHN H. KIRCHNER 157
Table 3 - Continued
Means
Characteristic and Traits ifferenc Pa Rb
Absent Present
~ ~~
Means
Characteristic and Traits
Absent Present
-182"
MD Not defensive - Defensive 7.10 7.87 .77 .237
E Humble - Assertive 6.02 4.77 -1.25 .763
-
Women
4 Small house(l2.2) .215""
MD Not defensive - Defensive 6.54 7.29 .75 ,177
A Reserved - Outgoing 7.71 6.86 ---85 .381
B Less intelligent - More intelligent 4.82 4.53 ---29 .113
E Humble - Assertive 4.42 3.73 -.69 ,120
N Forthright -Shrewd 5.01 4.62 --.39 .047
Q3 Undisciplined self-conflict - Controlled 6.22 6.86 .64 ,162
7 Shading of house (71.0) -205""
C Affected by feelings - Emotionally
stable 6.21 6.80 -59 .451
L Trusting - Suspicious 5.60 5.93 .33 ,174
N Forthright - Shrewd 5.21 4.87 --.34 .175
03 Undisciplined self-conflict - Controlled 6.59 6.18 --.41 .200
14 Tree geometrically centered (2.7) .153
N Forthright - Shrewd 4.92 6.33 1A1 .693
Q4 Relaxed - Tense 6.14 7.42 1.28 .307
49 Person has eye(s) (96.5) .199"
I Tough-minded - Tender-minded 6.75 7.98 1.23 .257
Q1 Conservative - Experimenting 7.06 5.4% -1.58 A26
03 Undisciplined self -co nflic t - Controlled 7.56 6.25 1.31 .146
04 Relaxed - Tense 4.87 6.22 1.35 .170
50 Person has ear(s) (35.6) .208*"
C Affected by feelings - Emotionally
stable 6.91 6-47 .44 .225
G Expedient - Conscientious 6.27 5.40 --.87 .775
73 Female has 2 or more feminine sex ( iracteris 5
(11.5) .204""
B Less intelligent - More intelligent 4.82 4.52 --.30 .153
E Humble - Assertive 4.26 4.92 .66 .195
H Shy - Venturesome 5.68 6.50 -82 .253
M Practical - Imaginative 6.10 6.62 -52 .187
a2 Group dependent - Self-sufficient 6.61 7.15 -54 .211
77 House above horizontal midline (2.2 .160"
MD Not defensive - Defensive 6.59 8.OO 1.41 .342
STANLEY S. MARZOLF and JOHN H. KIRCHNER 159
Table 3 - Continued
Means
Characteristic and Traits ifference pa Rb
Absent Present
M -
Practical Imaginative 6.52 7.60 1.08 .214
85 Person right of vertical midline (4.0) .156**
F Sober - Happy-go-lucky 6.94 5.44 -1.50 .489
0 Placid - Apprehensive 4.69 5-89 1.20 511
90 Tree paper based (6.8) .140
0 Placid - Apprehensive 4.80 3.94 --.86 .588
a3 Undisciplinedself-conflict - Controlled 6.27 7.54 1.27 .035
a4 Relaxed - Tense 6.23 3.82 -2.41 .460
.135
B 5.44 .67 .495
a4 4.94 -1.27 .505
I
count that Tree branches droop (44) en- self-conflict. Buck‘s hypothesis (1966, p.
ters into more relationships with 16PF 109) that this feature denotes generalized
traits than does any other drawing fea- insecurity does not seem to have been
ture. confirmed.
Person has ear(s) (50) occurred in
nearly three-fourths of the men’s draw- The data in this table raise many ques-
ings and was more likely to appear when tions which cannot be explored here in
the men were Trusting, Imaginative, and limited space; we have noted those rela-
Emotionally stable rather than Suspi- tionships which relate to more common
cious, Practical, and Affected by feelings. clinically-based hypotheses.
Approximately 20% of the men drew
women and thus their drawings would Drawings Judged “Disturbed”
have been less likely to show ears. There There were 11 drawings which all
were few drawings which appeared to be three judges agreed showed evidence of
long-haired males. According to Buck disturbance. There were 38 more on
(1964, p. 88) omission of ears may indi- whose drawings two of the three judges
cate presence of auditory hallucinations agreed. Since these numbers were small
or low level of intelligence. all 49, 2 0 men and 29 women, consti-
Hair on the face (59), possibly a phal- tuted the “disturbed” individuals group
lic substitute (Buck, 1966, p. 95), was (D). All the remaining individuals were
drawn more often by those who were considered not disturbed (ND).
Shrewd, Tough-minded, and Conservative It is noteworthy that 8.5% of the
rather than Forthright, Tender-minded, men’s drawings were judged to be Ds
and Experimenting. while only 3.9% of the women’s drawings
The relatively few males, (4.2%), who were so classified. This difference of 4.6%
drew females with the breast area marked is significant at the .01 level. The judges
were Shrewd, Imaginative, and Shy rather based their decisions on the drawings as a
than Forthright, Practical, and Venture- whole rather than upon supposed signifi-
some. The supposed connection between cance of specific characteristics. Two of
these traits and oral eroticism or maternal the judges did not know what characteris-
dependence (Buck, 1966, p. 96) does not tics were included in the list.
seem t o apply t o our data. Of the 108 characteristics, 30 occurred
Women who were Defensive, Reserved, in n o more than 2% of the drawings and
Less intelligent, Humble, Forthright, and one, Head present (47), occurred in
Controlled were more likely to draw a 99.5%. These 31 features, 28.7% of the
small house. The Reserved - Outgoing di- 108, were considered rare occurrences.
mension contributed most to the discrim- They were almost equally divided be-
ination. These findings seem to support tween house, tree, and person items and
Buck’s statement (1964, p. 34) that a 16 were related to the position of the
small drawing indicates inadequacy and drawings.
162 House-Tree-PersonDrawings and Personality Traits
There were 21 significant (p Q .02) not disturbed was derived from the data.
differences in the incidence between Ds This function, where the degree of judged
and NDs and nine of these were among disturbance is JD, was as follows: JD =
the rare occurrences. Head present (47), -.151A +.078F -.1971 +.223M +.181N
Person has eye(s) (49), Person has nose +.151Q1 +.166Q2 +.095Q3
(54), and Person has mouth (56) were less The higher the value of JD the more
frequent among the Ds. Person paper top- likely was the judgment of disturbance.
ped (94), Tree has swing (1 00), Nude per- The letters representing the variables are
son (102), Black person (drawn by white the trait designations as shown in Tables
(103), and Person has weapon (105) were 2 and 3. Substituting the means of each
all more frequent among the Ds. Other group for each of the relevant traits, the
features, not rare occurrences, found less mean for the Ds was 3.78 and the NDs,
frequently among the Ds were: Person 3.06. The multiple point biserial R was
has ear(s) (50), Person has hand(s) (51), 0.173 and the F ratio was significant at
Downloaded by [New York University] at 00:25 11 June 2015
Person has feet ( 5 9 , Person has hair on the .0035 level. In summary, there was a
head (58), Person is smiling (62), Person low correlation between a combination of
is same sex (70), and Person has buttons eight 16PF traits and a concensus of judg-
(104). Those found more frequently ments of disturbance based upon viewing
among the Ds were: Small tree (9,Fe- the drawings as a whole.
male breast area marked (7 l), House Cattell has developed discriminant
above horizontal midline (77), Person functions yielding neuroticism and
above horizontal midline (79), and Tree psychoticism scores and has provided
paper topped (93). Very few additional tentative typical neurotic and psychotic
features even approached the .02 level profiles (Cattell, Eber, & Tatsuoka, 1970,
and thus the above list is a good descrip- pp. 264-277). When mean stens are sub-
tion of the characteristics which influ- stituted in the profiles neuroticism and
enced the judges' decisions. psychoticism scores of 8.96 and 6.39 are
Regardless of the bases on which the obtained.
judges categorized the drawings as D or The relevant stens of the Ds and NDs
ND it is important to know whether were substituted in the neuroticism func-
those in the D group had 16PF scores tion. The resulting mean for the Ds was
that differed significantly from those in 5.26 and for the NDs, 5.83. The differ-
the ND group. Comparison of the two ence of .57 was significant at the .02 level
groups separately by sex yielded no dif- and thus, since the higher the score the
ferences that were significant at the .02 more neurotic, the advantage lay with the
level but there were five that were signifi- Ds. However, the difference, though reli-
cant at the .05 level. The D men were less able, was quite small. The range of scores
Defensive and were Shrewd rather than for both groups was from 0.54 to 11.23.
Forthright. The D women were more Re- The highest score in the D group was
served, Experimenting, and given to Un- 8.96. In the ND group 3.9% had scores of
disciplined self-conflict than were the ND 8.96 or more. The variance of the ND
women. group was reliably greater than that of
When D men and women together the D group. While a critical score for the
were compared with ND men and women function is not available it is safe to as-
the Ds were, in order of magnitude of the sume that, according to the function, the
difference, more Tender-minded, Self-suf- 3.9% with scores of 8.96 or more are
ficient, Experimenting, Shrewd, Imagina- probably neurotic. Such a possibility is
tive and Assertive and the NDs more not implausible. However, our main inter-
'Tough-minded, Group-dependent, Con- est is in the fact that there were little
servative, Forthright, Practical, and differences between the Ds and the NDs
Humble. Probabilities of chance differ- revealed by the neuroticism function.
ences varied from .005 to .049. The incidence of HTP characteristics
A function discriminating between among those whose neuroticism scores
those judged disturbed and those judged were more than one standard deviation
STANLEY S. MARZOLF and JOHN H. KIRCHNER 163
above the mean neuroticism score was significant at the .041 level, was obtained.
compared with the incidence among Detailed report on the traits and HTP
those whose scores were more than one characteristics producing these eigen val-
standard deviation below the mean. For ues is not made since it is the discriminat-
men and women together there were 18 ing power of the associated vectors, the
differences significant at the .05 level or canonical variates, that is important.
better, involving 18 different characteris- From each canonical variate, made up
tics. At the .02 level there were three dif- of certain HTP characteristics, it is pos-
ferences for men and four for women. sible to calculate the mean score of those
Two, Shading of tree (8) and Profile fat- in each of the low, middle, and high cate-
ing left (67), had lower incidence among gories of the associated 16PF trait. The
the highly neurotic men while Hat on reliability of the differences between
head (61) had higher incidence in this these means may then be computed. In
group. For women, the high neuroticism only a few cases were these differences
Downloaded by [New York University] at 00:25 11 June 2015
group showed lower incidence of Drive- reliable at the .05 level or better. For
way present (30) and seated person men, a canonical variate consisting of
(107); higher incidence of Person's hands Square window (19), Walkway leading to
behind back (52) and Person right of ver- the door (26), and Flowers by the house
tical midline (85). (28) produced a canonical correlation of
Substituting stens in the psychoticism .32 with the three categories of C Affect-
function produced means as follows: D, ed by feelings - Emotionally stable. The
5.63; ND, 5.98, both below the psychoti- mean scores on the variate were: low,
cism profile mean. Once again the better .164; middle, .167; and high, .223. The
adjustment level seems to have been with difference between the first two means
the Ds. However, this difference was not was not significant but the difference be-
reliable. The scores for the Ds ranged tween the means of the middle and high
from 1.20 to 12.70; for the NDs from - groups was significant at the .054 level.
2.30 to 13.0. Those whose drawings showed all three of
Scores on the 16PF obtained from 66 the characteristics were very likely to be
hospitalized men and women, mostly in the high (that is, the emotionally
schizophrenics, were available to us. Sub- stable) group. Only one other relationship
stituting these scores in the psychoticism deserves note. Location in the three cate-
function yielded a mean of 8.33. Scores gories, low, middle, and high, of N Forth-
ranged from 3.30 to 12.09. The differ- right - Shrewd was correlated to the ex-
ence between this mean and the mean of tent of .377 with a variate consisting of
our total sample was significant as well eight drawing characteristics of which
beyond the -01 level. two contributed about 74% to the deter-
mination, namely Female breast area
Canonical Variates marked (71) and Female has two or more
Maxwell (1961) has developed a pro- feminine sex symbols (73). If both of
cedure for finding canonical variates these characteristics were present the man
when the data are categortcal. Each HTP was more likely to be Shrewd rather than
characteristic is a categorical variable; Forthright. These findings are in accord-
either present or absent, and the low, ance with those .shown in Table 3 with
middle, and high levels of the 16PF traits respect to males drawing females with the
constituted the trait categories. Drawing breast area marked. The difference be-
features which had significant point biser- tween the means of the low and middle
ial IS with a 16PF trait were used as ele- groups was not reliable but that between
ments for computing the canonical vari- the middle and high group was reliable at
ate related to that trait. the .034 level.
For men, one eigen value reliably The data for the women yielded eigen
greater than zero (p < .02) was found for values reliably greater than zero at the .02
each of 14 of the 17 16PF traits. In one level for all but one of the 16PF traits
of these instances a second eigen value, and for three traits there was a second
164 House- Tree-PersonDrawings and Personality Traits
eigen value reliable at the same .02 level. of the men’s and women’s drawings but
However, in only one instance did the as- the remaining four were either rarely
sociated canonical variates reliably dis- present or rarely absent. The highest cor-
criminate between mean scores in the relation, 0.20, appeared twice in Table 1.
three 16PF categories to a degree that Though highly significant an r of this
was reliable at even the .05 level. magnitude and with these data brought a
The one exception to non-discrimina- maximum probable improvement of pre-
tion just mentioned occurred with respect dictive efficiency of only 5%.
to the three categories of Q1 Conservative From the point of view of the clini-
- Experimenting, where two significant cians there is little value in knowing what
eigen values were discovered. The associ- combinations of 16PF traits is likely to
ated canonical variates consisted of differ- be associated with the presence or ab-
ent weights attached to Oval window sence of a particular drawing characteris-
(20), Chimney present (23), Driveway tic. However, such data may suggest
Downloaded by [New York University] at 00:25 11 June 2015
present (30), Tree has roots (37), Person hypotheses concerning the relationship
has eye(s) (40), Person has ear(s) (50), between drawings and patterns of person-
Person actively moving (69), Tree paper ality organization. A total of 63 discrim-
based (90), and Smoke from chimney inant functions, reliable at least at the .05
(95). The first variate scores depended level, was obtained; 30 for men and 33
most on the presence of eyes, the absence for women. Table 3 shows 24 of these
of an oval window, and movement in the functions significant at least at the .02
person. This variate discriminated be- level. The highest multiple point biserial
tween the middle and the high group at R , 0.297, was between Tree branches
only the .07 level. However the second droop (44) and five 16PF traits. In rela-
variate, which depended most on the tively few instances was the R of suffi-
presence of a driveway and movement in cient magnitude to permit an appreciable
the person, discriminated between the improvement in predictive efficiency over
low and middle groups at the .0015 level. what would have been achieved simply by
Psychological meaning may be attached relying upon the incidence of the charac-
to each of these variates but doing so teristic. In general, the data show that
would entail a considerable amount of rarely occurring presence or absence of an
speculation. item is likely to be significantly related to
Various .alterations in the combina- a number of traits but that relationship is
tions of HTP characteristics used with not high enough to be very useful for pre-
each of the 16PF traits were made in the dictive purposes.
hope that more significant variates would Differential incidence related to low,
emerge; we are confident that n o signifi- middle, and high portions of the 16PF
cant variate has been undiscovered. distributions, significant at least at the
.05 level, were found in 83 drawing char-
Summary and Conclusions acteristics, 36 among the men and 47
Of the 3,672 point biserial rs obtained, among women. Only three were common
for men and women separately, between to both men and women. Especially note-
each of the 108 drawing characteristics worthy is the fact that in a number of
and each of the 1 7 16PF traits, 347 instances the relationships were non-lin-
(9.4%) were significantly greater than ear; presence or absence of a drawing fea-
zero at the .05 level. Of these, 134 (3.6%) ture was associated with being at the ex-
were significantly greater than zero at the tremes of the trait rather than in the
.05 level. Of these, 134 (3.6%) were sig- middle.
nificant at the .02 level. All but five were The pooled judgment of experienced
included, namely House paper-sided left clinicians whether drawings were indica-
(32), Head present (47), Person has feet tive of personality disturbance resulted in
( 5 9 Person has teeth (60), and Black 49 men and women being placed in the
person (drawn by a white) (103). Person disturbed category. The absence of com-
has feet (55) was present in roughly 75% mon features or the presence of rare ones
STANLEY S. MARZOLF and JOHN H. KIRCHNER 165
was clearly the basis on which the judg- Buck, J. N. The House-Tree-Person Technique,
ments were made. A low but reliable R Revised Manual. Los Angeles: Western
Psychological Services, 1966.
was obtained between category member-
Buck, J. N., & Hammer, E. F. (Eds.), Advances
ship and eight 16PF traits. There was no in the House-Tree-Person Technique: Varia-
reliable difference between those judged tions and Applications. Los Angeles: West-
disturbed and the others with respect to ern Psychological Services, 1969.
neuroticism and psychoticism profiles. Cattell, R. B. Handbook supplement for Form
There were a number of canonical vari- C of the Sixteen Personality Factor Ques-
tionnaire. Champaign, 11: Institute for Per-
ates consisting of combinations of HTP sonality and Ability Testing, 1962.
characteristics differentiating those in the Cattell, R. B., Eber, H. W., & Tatsuoka, M. M.
low, middle, and high portions of 16PF Handbook for the Sixteen Personality Fac-
traits. Here, once more, we found that tor Questionnaire (16PF). Champaign, 11: In-
the relationships, though significant, were stitute for Personality and Ability Testing,
1970.
of limited value for predictive purposes.
Downloaded by [New York University] at 00:25 11 June 2015