Williams Simon D, Wiener Judy, MacMillan Harriet
Department of Human Development and Applied Psychology, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto, Canada.
Child Abuse Negl. 2005 Jun;29(6):701-13. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2004.10.013.
This exploratory study examined the discriminant validity of 10 human-figure features commonly used by many proponents of the draw-a-person (DAP) projective technique as evidence of childhood sexual abuse. Two exploratory features were also examined.
Rather than drawing human figures, 64 children (M = 8 years, 9 months), including 19 sexually abused children, 26 nonsexually abused but emotionally/behaviourally troubled children, and 19 nonabused, nonclinical children, were instructed to build male and female figures using groups of prefabricated pieces of human-figure body parts. Unbeknownst to the children, each group of parts contained a potential sexual abuse feature (or features).
None of the human-figure features under examination, either individually, or in combination, distinguished the sexually abused group from the other two groups of children.
In accordance with years worth of DAP projective technique research, no support for the validity of the human-figure features under examination as evidence of childhood sexual abuse, was found.
本探索性研究考察了许多画人（DAP）投射技术支持者常用的10种人物特征作为儿童性虐待证据的区分效度。还考察了两种探索性特征。
64名儿童（平均年龄8岁9个月），包括19名遭受性虐待的儿童、26名未遭受性虐待但有情绪/行为问题的儿童以及19名未受虐待的非临床儿童，未被要求画人物，而是被指示使用预制的人物身体部件组来构建男性和女性人物。孩子们不知道的是，每组部件都包含一个潜在的性虐待特征。
所考察的人物特征，无论是单独还是组合起来，均无法将遭受性虐待的儿童组与其他两组儿童区分开来。
根据多年来对DAP投射技术的研究，未发现所考察的人物特征作为儿童性虐待证据具有效度的支持。
