Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Aug;52(4):728-738.
doi: 10.1007/s10578-020-01058-6. Epub 2020 Sep 12.

Validity of the Draw a Person: A Quantitative Scoring System (DAP:QSS) for Clinically Evaluating Intelligence

Alda Troncone  1 , Antonietta Chianese  2 , Alfonso Di Leva  2 , Maddalena Grasso  2 , Crescenzo Cascella  2
Affiliations

Validity of the Draw a Person: A Quantitative Scoring System (DAP:QSS) for Clinically Evaluating Intelligence

Alda Troncone et al. Child Psychiatry Hum Dev. 2021 Aug.

Abstract

To assess the psychometric properties of the Draw a Person: A Quantitative Scoring System (DAP:QSS), in 2543 children (M = 11.43 ± 3.06 years), correlations between drawings scores and Raven's Matrices scores, age, and academic achievement were examined. Although older children (> 11 years) obtained higher drawing scores than younger ones (p < 0.001), age significantly correlated with DAP:QSS scores only in children younger than 11 years (r = 0.493, p < 0.001), indicating conflictive evidence for construct validity and a possible ceiling effect. No correlations emerged between DAP:QSS scores and grades (r = 0.056, p = 0.097). DAP:QSS scores were significantly associated with Raven's Matrices score, but low correlation coefficients (0.156-0.498), low sensitivity (0.12), and high false negative (87.9%) and positive (82%) rates suggest poor DAP:QSS validity as an intelligence measure. The researchers concluded that DAP:QSS failed to produce a psychometrically sound assessment of children's intellectual functioning.

Keywords: Adolescents; Children; Draw a Person: A Quantitative Scoring System; Intelligence; Scholastic achievement.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Number of participants classified according to Raven’s Colored Progressive Matrices (RCPM) and Draw a Person: A Quantitative Scoring System (DAP:QSS) scores and related intelligence categories
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Number of participants classified according to Raven’s Standard Progressive Matrices (RSPM) and Draw a Person: A Quantitative Scoring System (DAP:QSS) scores and related intelligence categories
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Examples of false positives and negatives
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Lilienfeld SO, Wood JM, Garb HN. The scientific status of projective techniques. Psychol Sci Public Interest. 2000;1(2):27–66. - PubMed
    1. Mathijssen AS, Feltzer MJ, Hoogeveen L. Identifying highly gifted children by analyzing human figure drawings: a literature review and a theoretical framework. Psychol Test Assess Model. 2018;60(4):493–515.
    1. Motta RW, Little SG, Tobin MI. The use and abuse of human figure drawings. Sch Psychol Q. 1993;8(3):162.
    1. Naglieri JA. Draw-a-Person: a Quantitative Scoring System. San Antonio: The Psychological Corporation; 1988.
    1. Abell SC, Wood W, Liebman SJ. Children’s human figure drawings as measures of intelligence: the comparative validity of three scoring systems. J Psychoeduc Assess. 2001;19(3):204–215.

LinkOut - more resources