Keywords: graphic projective methods, qualitative analysis, quantitative evaluation, formal and substantive aspects, symptom complexes


The article deals with opportunities and the problems of effectiveness of projective graphic tests usage. Basic principles of evaluation (interpretation) of the picture, which have to be considered by a practical psychologist during conducting a psychological examination are considered. Graphic projective methods of family diagnostics aimed at detection of the peculiarities of the emotional experiences of the child in relation to their interpersonal interaction and subjective family situation are described. The main criteria of detailed assessment of the characteristics of inter-family relationships by unstructured family drawing projective test are outlined (absence of a picture of a family member; absence of the author in the image; space of a sheet filled with drawing; placing figures on a sheet; images of inanimate objects; the size of the character or the subject depicted; the size and features of the image of the parts of the characters; images of non-family characters; placing the author and other characters on a sheet in relation to other figures; distance between figures etc.). The system of quantitative evaluation of the Kinetic test is presented. Five symptom complexes are highlighted: 1) favorable family situation; 2) anxiety; 3) family conflict; 4) feelings of inferiority; 5) hostility in the family situation. Three groups of questions for conversation after drawing are listed: 1) provocative questions that encourage the child to discuss feelings openly; 2) sociometric questions for the child to make negative and positive choices; 3) questions to clarify the meaning of the drawn situation or certain details. Test modifications are highlighted: usage of colored pencils; drawing a family that is busy with a business; use of the test for adults and the whole family; drawing a family in a difficult situation; family in the form of symbols; compatible family drawing.

Author Biography

Yaroslava Vasylkevych, SHEI «Pereiaslav-Khmelnytskyi Hryhorii Skovoroda State Pedagogical University»

PhD in Psychology, Associate Professor, Associate Professor of the Department of Psychology SHEI «Pereiaslav-Khmelnytskyi Hryhorii Skovoroda State Pedagogical University»


Barkan, 2014 – Barkan A. I. O chem govoriat risunki detei: rukovodstvo dlia roditelei i pedagogov. Moskva : Eterna, 2014. 207 s.

Beliauskaite, 1987 – Beliauskaite R. F. Risunochnye proby kak sredstvo diagnostiki razvitiia lichnosti rebenka. Diagnosticheskaia i korrektsionnaia rabota shkolnogo psikhologa: sb. nauch. tr. / redkol. : I. V. Dubrovina (otv. red.) i dr. Moskva : Izd-vo APN SSSR, 1987. S. 67–80.

Berns, Kaufman, 2000 – Berns R. S., Kaufman S. Kh. Kineticheskii risunok semi. Moskva : Smysl, 2000. 146 s.

Burlachuk, 2007 – Burlachuk L. F. Slovar-spravochnik po psikhodagnostike. 3-e izd. Sankt-Peterburg : Piter, 2007. 688 s.

Dileo, 2001 – Dileo D. Detskii risunok. Diagnostika i interpretatsiia. Moskva : Aprel-Press, Izd-vo EKSMO-press, 2001. 272 s.

Semago, Semago, 2005 – Semago N. Ia., Semago M. M. Teoriia i praktika otsenki psikhicheskogo razvitiia rebenka. Doshkolnyi i mladshii shkolnyi vozrast. Sankt-Peterburg : Rech, 2005. 384 s.

Khomentauskas, 1985 – Khomentauskas G. T. Otrazhenie mezhlichnostnykh otnoshenii v diagnosticheskikh risunkakh semi : avtoref. diss. na soisk. uchen. st. kand. psikhol. nauk : 19.00.01. Moskva, 1985. 21 s.

Khomentauskas, 2004 – Khomentauskas G. T. Psikhodiagnostika mezhlichnostnykh otnoshenii. Metodika «Risunok semi». Obshchaia psikhodiagnostika / pod red. A. A. Bodaleva, V. V. Stolina. Sankt-Peterburg : Izd-vo «Rech», 2004. S. 292-313.

How to Cite
Vasylkevych, Y. (2019). ПРОБЛЕМА ЕФЕКТИВНОСТІ ТА ІНТЕРПРЕТАЦІЇ ГРАФІЧНИХ ПРОЕКТИВНИХ МЕТОДІВ СІМЕЙНОЇ ДІАГНОСТИКИ. HUMANITARIUM, 42(1), 28-40. Retrieved from https://humanitarium.com.ua/index.php/hum/article/view/252