| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立高雄師範大學 === 輔導與諮商研究所 === 96 === The study aims to explore the distinguishable graphic symbol of Children with Highly-aggressive Behavior and Children with Highly Anxiety on House-Tree-Person Drawings (H-T-P) Meanwhile, the researcher made an inductive investigation on self-descriptive drawing story of the two group children. Furthermore, the researcher compared and contrasted their performances in the drawing story. In the study, House-Tree-Person Drawings was the main research aid.
The study employed the sampling in which 281 children at the fourth to sixth grade of three primary schools at Long-jing Township was sampled. Children with Highly-aggressive Behavior were sifted by two research aids; Children with Highly Anxiety were sifted by one research aid. Finally, 20 children were sifted as the subjects. The House-Tree-Person Drawings had been administered individually to all subjects by the researcher, and all subjects were asked to read aloud the picture drawing story. Structured interview was employed to collect data. Chi-square test and t-test were selected as the way to analyze the quantitative data. Besides, open-coding and inductive analyses were used to analyze the data collected by interview. The main findings were as follows:
1. The aspect of drawing expression: (1) In the picture of Children with Highly-aggressive Behavior, these characteristics of “sharp/long finger,” “aggressive weapon,” “fat and round body” appeared which implied emotional indicators were much higher than Children with Highly Anxiety. (2) In the picture of Children with Highly Anxiety, the characteristics of “shadowed big eyes,” “exaggerative eyes or over-emphasized eyes in detail” appeared which implied emotional indicators were much higher than Children with Highly-aggressive Behavior. (3) There was no significant difference on the emotional indicator total scores between Highly-aggressive Behavior Children and Highly Anxiety Children. (4) There was no significant difference on the time used to finish the pictures between the two groups. (5) There was no significant difference on the sequence of finishing house, tree and people.
2.On the aspects of drawing story: (1)For children with Highly-aggressive Behavior , the names of houses were more specific and negative （most names were non-fruit trees and elders）; for Children with Highly Anxiety, the names were vague and positive. (2) For Children with Highly-aggressive Behavior, their speech was more direct, and aggressive weapons happened frequently; for Children with Highly Anxiety, there was more emotional description. (3) For Children with Highly-aggressive Behavior, their behavior was over-matured. For the two groups of children, as they described of “others’ behavior”, the frequency of interaction was few. (4)In the interview, Children with Highly-aggressive Behavior answered “I don’t know” frequently, but not for Children with Highly Anxiety. (5) By the connection between people and house in the drawing, the relationship between personality and family was revealed. (6) For the two groups of children, the need of family and friendship were looked forward to.
3. The performance of integrative drawing and story contents: (1) For Children with Highly-aggressive Behavior, there were three emotional indicators achieve significant gains, which implied extroverted behaviors. (2) For Children with Highly Anxiety, during the storytelling interview, they had diversity of cognitive performance, which implied more introverted behaviors.
Finally, the entire study was concluded with a summary of the major findings, pedagogical implications, and suggestions for counselors in counseling children and in future studies.
|
|---|
