Academic Training And Professional Practice Settings

1294 WordsMay 11, 20166 Pages
Historically,drawing tests have been the target of extensive criticism based on incisive reviews of the literature (e.g., Lilienfeld et al., 2000; Motta et al., 1993; Smith & Dumont, 1995; Ziskin, 1995).The intent of the current study is to determine whether this collective movement has had a deleterious impact on the popularity of drawing methods in graduate trainingprograms and professionalusage worldwide. To that end, the author identified survey-based research with regard to drawing techniques that reported on assessment training and test usage patterns from 1989-2015. The 60 identified survey-based or records-based studies served as the data pool(USA=47; Overseas nations=13). The analysis showed that 38 of the 60 studies (63%) reported thatdrawing tests were viewed positively in the USA and in some countries outside of Europe. However, a bifurcation trend between academic training and professional practice settings was noted. Drawing techniques were ranked ‘moderately’ high (amongst the top 15 tests) in terms of usage, in 23 of the 49 studies of practice settings. However, only 1 of the 11 studies of academic settings showed a high degree of training emphasis with drawing techniques. In professional settings, drawing methods appear to be somewhat popular in clinical psychology and school psychology practice, less so in forensic and counseling psychology, and largely ignored in neuropsychological assessment. On a cautionary note, this review observed a slight
Open Document