Abstract

The aim was to verify the potential of holistic approaches towards the evaluation of human figure drawing. Groht-Marnat, Tharinger, Stark favour this approach, and findings seem to legitimize considerations about its diagnostic productivity. Yama, Dans-Lopez and Tarroja have identified bizarre and artistic quality criteria for drawing that have a relevant interpretative meaning. Within the study involving 525 normal adult subjects, the hypothesis of differences in personality traits and performance level produced by authors of selected types of drawings, was verified. The criterium of bizarre drawing proved to be an important indicator of intellectual abilities monitored by subtests of the ISA-S test, the non-verbal CF 2A test, Decision-making test. They achieved the lowest scores in all parameters, with significance in relation to more detailed drawings. Results from IHAVEZ and DOPEN questionnaires suggest that bizarre character producers are more emotionally instable, less emotionally resilient, less anticipating, and less self-controlling, less rational, responding more intensely to problems and are less orientated towards their solution. They are more neurotic and present more psychotic experience. The main limitation is the chosen approach. Holistically evaluated drawing is rare in terms of its occurrence in a normal population. Even within the files involving several hundred participiants, it is possible to clearly classify drawing in the maximum number of tens. Diversity of the terminology and methodological ambiguity constitutes another limitation. The bizarreness itself is not interpreted clearly, rather the contrary.