1. House-Tree-Person Projective Drawing Technique
Presentation by:
Jean Evans & Kristen Speer
CNED 5303
11/11/04

2. Facts Author: John N Buck
Developed in 1947 with revisions in 1948, 1949, and (Buck and Warren) 1992
Originally developed as an outgrowth of the Goodenough Scale* utilized to access intellectual functioning

3. *Florence Goodenough developed Measurement of Intelligence by Drawings in The instrument focus was on the human figure and its purpose was to derive a measure of I.Q.

4. Facts (cont.) Publisher: Western Psychological Services
12031 Wilshire Blvd
Los Angeles, CA

5. Cost Many types of packages available H-T-P Interpretation Booklet:
4 page booklet that allows administrator to record, score, and interpret all information from a drawing session
$19.92/package of 25

6. Purpose
*Designed to aid clinician in obtaining information concerning an individual’s sensitivity, maturity, flexibility, efficiency, degree of personality integration, and interaction with the environment.
*Provides a structured context for the projection of unconscious material. *

7. Purpose (cont)
*Buck felt that artistic creativity represents a stream of flow onto graphic art. He believed that through drawings, subjects objectified unconscious differences by sketching the inner image of the primary process. *

8. Recommended Use
Use in combination with other projective measurement instruments, usually given first as an “ice-breaker”
Anyone over 3 years of age
Especially appropriate for individuals who are non-English-speaking, culturally different, educationally deprived, or developmentally disabled.

9. Administration
Client draws three objects: a house, a tree, a person on plain paper
Administrator then uses a Post-Drawing Inquiry checklist (specific questions) to enable client to describe, define, and interpret his/her drawings
Client responses are organized under 8 categories

10. Administration (cont.)
8 categories for client responses:
General Observations
Proportion
Perspective
Detailing
Nonessential Details
Irrelevant Details
Line Quality
Use of Color

11. Drawing Analysis
Drawings are interpreted using two “paths”; intra-subjective and inter-subjective
First path, intra-subjective, considers the content and quality of the three drawings; also explores the depth of material behind the drawings
Second path, inter-subjective, considers features indicative of a certain emotional tendency

12. Time Factors and Considerations
No time limit (is based on average time)
Paper given to client to draw on should be blank
This is a projective, not a diagnostic, test
Not “standardized”
Can purchase a supplemental interrogation form which derives an IQ score

13. Reliability/Validity
*Reliability and validity studies have been most supportive of the cognitive uses of the test in 3 to 10 year old children. *

14. Normative Data
Not used/appropriate for this type of test as every drawing is different for every person (individualized)
No norms/no standardization data available
Some aspects of drawings may be indicative of psychological trends

15. Administrator/Interpreter Qualifications
Bachelor’s degree

16. Personal Evaluation Limitations:
original test written in 1970’s; Family/cultural values, trends, ideas have changed
Interpretation may be influenced by clinician bias/prejudice

17. Personal Evaluation(cont)
Advantages:
Good ice-breaker to use in preparation for other tests
Good for engaging reluctant clients
Used for any ages over 3
Useful for non-verbal clients
Useful for non-English speaking clients

18. Bibliography
Paul Jerry, Ph.D., Centre for Graduate Education in Applied Psychology, Notes on Projective Drawings
Richard Niolon, Ph.D., Chicago School of Professional Psychology, Notes on Projective Drawings
Western Psychological Services (WPS)