The Korea Journal of Counseling 2004, Vol. 5, No. 4, 1217-1234 (KSD) (Kinetic School Drawing: KSD),. 4, 5, 6 601(32153.4%, 280 46.6%), (KSD). t-test,.. 1. (KSD).,.,,,,,,.,,.,.,,,.. 2.,.,. :,,,,,,,, (Corresponding Author) :/ / 5317-1 TEL : (053) 655-2152/ E-mail : pinakim@hanmail.net - 1217 -
,..,.,., (,,, 1998). (1983),.,,,,,,,.., (social unit)., (, 1976).,,,,. (1973), (, 1997 ). Rutter,,.,, (, 1989 ). (1964)Hurlock(1956),., Asher(1977) 11.,, (, 1997 ).. Rosenthal (1978),, (, 2000 ). GoodBrophy(1984). WeinsteinMiddlestadt - 1218 -
(KSD) (1982).,..,..,,...,.,. (Kinetic School Drawing; KSD). KnoffProut(1988),,, (KSD). (KSD) (Selecivity of perception)....,..,,,,.,,.., (, ). (1995), (1996),,, (1998) KSD,,, (1998).,, (KSD).,. - 1219 -
,.,.,., 2 4, 5, 6 670. 601(32153.4%, 28046.6%) (1). Coopersmith (1981) (1992). 13, (1 ) (4) 4,., (r=.271) 12. Cronbach s =.791. (1994). 10 (1) (4) 4,. r=.30 10. Cronbach s =.831. / (Hui, 1998; Triandis, McCusker & Hui, 1990) /. 9 (1) (4) 4,., 7. Cronbach s =.749. (Kinetic School Draw ing ; KSD) A4 (210 297), (4B),,. KSD.,.,..,,.,,. KSD (KFD), BurnsKaufman(1970, 1972) 2. Burns Kaufman(1970, 1972),,,, 5 0 8-1220 -
(KSD) 1. N=601 N % N % 4 208 34.6% 91 15.4% 5 206 34.3% 366 61.8% 6 187 31.1% 135 22.8% 321 53.4% 170 28.8% 280 46.6% 370 62.7% 274 45.6% 50 8.5% 49 8.2% 306 51.4% 229 38.1% 263 44.2% 48 8.1% 26 4.4% 195 32.7% 230 38.8% 370 62.1% 336 56.7% 31 5.2% 27 4.5%. missing value.. 5,,,,, 42. 3. 40 3. AB.912, AC.680, BC.770. 2003320037., (KFD) (2003), (2003), (1992), (1994), Hui(1998), Triandis, McCusker & Hui (1990). 20033 4 5 40,. 20036 7 4, 456 670... (Cronbach s ),.. - 1221 -
,, t-test.,.,,,,,, 5. t-test. t-test 2. 2 (t=-2.64, p<.01) (t=- 2.58, p <.05).,.,,,. (t=- 2.13, p <.05), (t=- 2.84, p<.01).. (t=-3.09, p <.01), (t=-2.83, p <.01),.,,. t-test 3. 3,,. (t=-2.99, p<.01), (t=2.27, p <.05), (t=-2.68, p <.01).,. (t=- 2.99, p<.01), (t=- 2.37, p <.05),. (t=- 2.07, p <.05).. (t=- 2.70, p <.01), (t=-3.52, p<.001), (t=- 2.35, p<.05).,.. (t=- 2.85, p<.01),,. (t=3.14, p <.01).. 5(, - 1222 -
(KSD) 2. N M SD N M SD t 96.10.31 137.18.38-1.57 87.05.21 128.15.36-2.64 ** 98.11.32 136.20.40-1.84 96.88.33 137.95.22-1.90 87.99.11 128.99.09-0.28 98.88.33 135.94.24-1.62 96.98.14 137.99.12-0.36 87.80.40 128.93.26-2.58 * 98.97.17 136.98.15-0.41 95 2.18 1.50 137 2.55 1.38-1.93 87 2.61 1.22 128 2.75 1.18-0.84 98 2.32 1.50 135 2.46 1.44-0.73 96 1.74 1.24 137 2.08 1.17-2.13 * 86 1.78 1.23 128 2.19.99-2.84 ** 98 1.78 1.23 135 1.93 1.21-0.93 95 1.12.80 137 1.29.74-1.73 87 1.33.73 128 1.45.65-1.26 98 1.30.80 135 1.29.77 0.07 95.81.39 136.95.22-3.09 ** 87.86.35 127.92.27-1.34 97.82.38 133.95.22-2.83 ** 96 1.51.85 136 1.74.97-1.94 88 1.90 1.01 129 1.88 1.01 0.16 98 1.52.88 135 1.76.94-1.96 95 93.46 40.65 136 95.57 38.12-0.40 86 102.81 51.73 127 101.78 43.66 0.15 97 93.46 42.35 135 91.90 45.01 0.27 82 101.57 54.06 124 105.27 52.20-0.49 85 106.13 58.29 120 103.78 54.21 0.30 94 91.22 48.63 132 87.33 46.26 0.61 98 2.68.81 138 2.65.87 0.28 96.81.39 137.80.40 0.18 87.86.35 129.93.26-1.57 * p<.05, * * p<.01 98.86.35 136.80.40 1.13 1 98.89.32 138.86.35 0.73 2 98.98.14 138 1.00.00-1.42 3 98.77.43 138.75.43 0.21 4 98.96.20 138.97.17-0.49 5 98.95.22 138.92.27 0.86-1223 -
, 3. * p<.05, * * p<.01 N M SD N M SD t 56.04.19 108.17.37-2.99 ** 48.02.14 107.10.31-2.27 * 56.05.23 110.18.39-2.68 ** 57.82.38 108.98.14-2.99 ** 48 1.00.00 107.98.14 0.95 55.84.37 109.96.19-2.37 * 57.98.13 108.99.10-0.46 48.79.41 107.93.26-2.07 * 56.98.13 110.99.10-0.49 56 2.38 1.27 108 2.57 1.29-0.94 49 2.51 1.14 107 3.02 1.07-2.70 ** 56 2.43 1.23 110 2.59 1.38-0.74 56 1.93 1.13 107 2.24 1.13-1.69 49 1.76.95 107 2.32.92-3.52 *** 56 1.86 1.17 110 2.16 1.14-1.61 56 1.21.68 108 1.44.75-1.92 49 1.33.66 107 1.52.62-1.81 56 1.41.73 110 1.45.74-0.29 56.89.31 108.94.25-0.95 49.88.33 107.92.28-0.75 55.84.37 109.96.19-2.35 * 57 1.37.77 109 1.77 1.02-2.85 ** 51 1.75 1.02 107 2.00 1.02-1.47 55 1.60.85 110 1.85 1.03-1.68 56 83.95 36.33 107 90.13 38.72-0.99 48 99.63 48.32 106 105.03 44.09-0.68 56 84.84 34.51 110 88.25 41.74-0.53 48 106.79 53.44 103 105.54 48.80 0.14 47 99.74 54.75 103 108.77 52.00-0.97 56 89.21 49.56 107 90.41 54.02-0.14 57 2.91.47 111 2.57.95 3.14 ** 57.77.42 108.81.39-0.65 50.94.24 107.93.26 0.34 56.82.39 110.81.39 0.19 1 57.88.33 111.86.35 0.38 2 57.98.13 111.99.10-0.43 3 57.63.49 111.77.43-1.76 4 57.96.19 111.97.16-0.29 5 57 1.00.00 111.87.33 3.99 ** - 1224 -
(KSD) ) (t=3.99, p<.001).,. t-test 4. (t=8.46, p <.01),.,,,. (t=- 1.99, p <.05), (t=-2.02, p <.05).. (t=-2.83, p <.01), (t=- 2.27, p <.05), (t=-2.35, p <.05),. (t=- 2.15, p <.05),. (t= - 2.30, p<.05),. (t=- 2.20, p<.05).. (t=-2.29, p <.05).. (KSD) 5. 5. 5 73.3%. 53.8%, 87.0%.,,,,,,. 82.5%, p<.01 (X ²=61.77). 66.0%, 90.6%.,,,,,,,, ( ),, 5 11. 71.0%, p <.05 (X ²=56.06). 52.8%, 83.0%.,,,,,,,, 9. - 1225 -
, 4. * p<.05, * * p<.01 N M SD N M SD t 101.08.27 156.14.35-1.59 96.05.22 150.08.27-0.84 104.11.31 158.15.36-1.11 102.85.36 156.96.21-2.62 ** 96 1.00 00 150 1.00.00 104.88.32 157.94.23-1.59 102.97.17 156 1.00.00-1.75 96.82.38 150.90.30-1.57 104.96.19 158.99.11-1.23 102 2.27 1.36 156 2.62 1.33-1.99 * 96 2.66 1.10 150 2.95 1.14-2.02 * 104 2.35 1.41 158 2.59 1.41-1.40 102 1.75 1.16 156 2.16 1.14-2.83 ** 95 1.98 1.02 150 2.27.93-2.27 * 104 1.69 1.17 158 2.04 1.17-2.35 * 102 1.20.75 156 1.33.75-1.44 96 1.36.63 150 1.54.62-2.15 ** 104 1.31.78 158 1.35.75-0.49 101.82.38 155.92.27-2.30 * 96.88.33 149.92.27-1.09 104.86.35 155.92.28-1.47 102 1.44.77 156 1.67.92-2.20 * 96 1.98 1.02 150 1.87.99 0.86 103 1.58.89 158 1.71.93-1.09 101 94.90 43.31 155 96.05 38.26-0.22 95 103.04 48.84 149 107.60 17.36-0.72 103 86.73 46.80 158 91.47 42.93-0.84 93 96.22 48.49 142 105.12 48.25-1.38 92 99.16 54.81 144 106.36 53.12-1.00 100 80.74 43.00 151 90.30 49.04-1.59 105 2.80.64 161 2.73.79 0.80 102.85.36 156.80.40 1.08 96.86.34 152.95.21-2.29 * 104.86.35 158.78.41 1.49 1 105.90.31 161.88.32 0.33 2 105.99.10 161.99.11 0.22 3 105.72.45 161.70.46 0.49 4 105.99.10 161.99.08-0.31 5 105.95.21 161.90.30 1.64-1226 -
(KSD) 5. - 1.288-0.472 2.215 * 0.728-0.603-0.200 1.486 * 0.466 0.311 0.086-0.499-0.132 0.589 0.223-1.791 * -0.630 1.290 0.440-0.066 * -0.019 1.478 *** 0.378 1.896 ** 0.546-2.213-0.159-1.183-0.139 - - -0.732-0.217 1.425 *** 0.383-0.985-0.280-3.897-0.482-4.031-0.338 4.288 0.402 1.926 ** -0.646-0.573 * -0.188 0.079 * 0.027 3.191 0.455 - - - 1.625-0.216 0.168 0.244-0.280-0.363 0.237 * 0.317-0.076-0.092 0.441 0.479 0.117 * 0.132-0.010-0.015 0.137 ** 0.177-0.135-0.187-0.034 * -0.042-0.354-0.404 0.139 ** 0.161 0.133 ** 0.137 0.304 *** 0.282-0.295 * -0.287-0.040-0.049-0.200-0.227 0.394 * 0.455 0.840 0.565 0.811 0.588-0.011-0.008 0.001 0.001-0.086-0.054 0.856 0.538-0.560-0.443-0.133-0.097-0.535 * -0.405 0.953 ** 0.290-1.268-0.325 1.976 * 0.606 0.141 0.044 0.271 0.083-0.910-0.272 0.362 ** 0.108 2.287 * 0.603-0.112-0.033-0.173-0.163 0.201 * 0.190 0.392 0.341-0.147-0.147 0.208 0.209-0.042-0.042 0.198 0.186-0.067-0.066-0.090-0.083-0.001-0.029 0.008 0.289-0.003-0.108 0.000 0.016-0.006-0.267-0.001-0.070-0.004-0.154 0.003 0.112 0.003 0.131 0.004 0.207 0.000 0.005 0.005 0.252-0.004-0.213-0.003-0.154 0.000 0.000-0.003-0.157-0.003-0.164 0.004 0.198-0.056-0.046-0.273 * -0.215-0.114-0.079-0.396-0.153 1.051 0.401-0.596-0.229 0.754 0.223 0.368 0.094 1.249 0.338-0.692-0.252-0.712-0.276-0.486-0.191 1-0.214-0.073-0.102-0.035 0.418 0.137 2 2.319 0.233 0.991 0.117-0.606-0.070 3-0.372-0.166 0.639 0.291-0.339-0.158 4-0.031-0.004-1.218-0.202 - - 5-0.196-0.049-1.068 ** -0.311-1.042-0.290 -.339 1.180-5.642 Wilk s Lamda.767.603.759 X² 46.033 61.770 ** 56.059 *.483.630.491 73.3% 82.5% 71.0% * p <.05, * * p <.01, * * * p <.001-1227 -
,,, t-test,,,,.,,., (1996),,.,...,... Schildkrout(1972)., (1992),,, (1984) (, 2004 ).,.,,,, 5.,..,. (, 1993)..,. (2000). M=4.04..,., - 1228 -
(KSD),.. (1998)., (34.9%) (24.1%), (36.0%) (23.8%). (24.4%) (7.8%).,,., (1995),,,.,,. (,,, 1994).,., 5,., (, 2001). (, 1993). (1990),.., (1999) (, 1999 ).,,.,,,.,. (1996),.,.,. (, 1993,, 1995, Hater, 1982).,,., - 1229 -
,.,, (, 1993).,..,,,.,,.., (,,, 19994).,..,.. Vosk(1982),.,. (1990),,.,,,,, (,, 1997). (KSD),,,, 5,,, 73.3%.,. Harter(1988).,,.,. - 1230 -
(KSD), (Harter, 1982).. Phillips (1984),. (1987). (, 2000 ).,.,., p<.01, StipekHoffman (1980). Cooley Mead, (the looking glass self).,..,,,..,, (2000)..,. (1993).., (1990)..,. (2003).. :. (2003).. :.,, (1993)., : (1996)..,. (2000)..,.,, (1998). (KSD)., 5(2), 229-318. - 1231 -
, (1999)..,. (2001)..,., (1992). Methylphenidate,.., 11(1), 235-248. (1986)..,., (1997).,,.,. (1994)..,. (1990)..,. (1994)..,. (2004). - -.,.,, (1998). KSD., 5(1), 181-195., (1995).., 2(2), 37-49., (1996). (KSD)., 3(2), 77-99. (1990)..,. (1993).. :. (1995)..,. Burns, R. C., & Kaufman, S. H.(1970). K inetic Family Drawing; A n Introduction to Understading Children Through K inetic Family Drawing. New York: Brunner/Mazal. Burns, R. C., & Kaufman, S. H.(1972). A ctions, Styles and Symbols in K inetic Family Drawing. New York: Brunner/Mazal. Comb, A. S.(1983). The R elationship of child p ercep tions to achievement and B ehavior in the Early School Y ears. Washington. DC.: Department of Health, Education. and Fare. Cooley, C. H.(1902). H uman nature and the social order. New York: Charles Scribner s Sons. Davidon, H. H. & Lang, G.(1960). Children s perceptions of their teachers feelings toward them related to self-perception, school achievement, and behavior. Journal Exp erimental E ducation, Vol. 29, 107-118. Good, T. L., & Brophy, J. E.(1984). Teacher s communication of differential expectations for children classroom performance some behavior data. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 236-237. Harter, S.(1982). The perceived competence scale for children. Child development, 53, 87-97. Harter, S. (1988). Causes, correlates and the functional role of global self-worth: A lifespan perspective. In J. Kolligan & R. Sternberg(Eds.), P ercep tions of competence and incomp etence across the lif e- span. New Haven, CT.: Yale University Press. Hui, C. H. (1998). Measurement of individualism- - 1232 -
(KSD) collectivism. Journal of R esearch on P ersonality, 22, 17-36. Knoff, H., & Prout, H. T.(1988). K inetic Drawing System f or Fam ily and School: A Handbook. California Western Psychological Service. Phillips, D. A.(1984). The illusion of incompetence among academically competent children. Child Developm ent, 55, 2000-2016. Triandis, H., McCusker, C., & Hui, H.(1990) Multimethod probes of individualism and collecivism. J ournal of P ersonality and Social Psychology, 59, 1006-1020. Vosk, B., Forehand, R., Parker, J., & Richard, K.(1982). A multimethod comparison of popular and unpopular children. D evelopmental Psychology, 18, 571-575. : 2004. 09. 30 : 2004. 11. 07 : 2004. 11. 15-1233 -
The Korea Journal of Counseling 2004, Vol. 5, No. 4, 1217-1234 On the Connection of Elementary School Children's Perception of Self, Teachers, and Friends with Their KSD(Kinetic School Drawing) Reactive Characteristics Mi-Kyeong Jo Ayang Elementary School Gab-Sook Kim Yeungnam University This study purports to know elementary school children's perceptual characteristics of self, teachers, and friends shown in their KSD test and psychological diagnosis, then to define the validity of the KSD(Kinetic School Drawing) test as a diagnostic instrument. Subjects for the study are 601 elementary school children (321 boys 53.4%, 280 girls 46.6%) who are in 4th, 5th, and 6th grade. The study instruments are KSD as a projective method to measure perception of self, teacher and friends. To find out perceptual characteristics of self, teachers, and friends shown in KSD analyze t-test of independent verification. And Discriminant analysis is taken for the validity of KSD as a diagnostic measurement of self, teachers and friends. The results so obtained are as follows. 1. Perceptions of self, teachers and friends on KSD produce the following results. First, about KSD on self', children with negative perception of self have unsatisfactory relationship with teachers and show difficulty adjusting to school life. Second, about KSD on teachers', children with negative perception of teachers produced drawings of abuse, cruelty, and stiff posture, whereas children with positive perception of teachers expressed drawings of cooperation, full faces, and friendly looks. But children in the positive side have tendency to draw separately. Third, about KSD on friends', the group with positive perception of friends draw in their art work more friendly expressions and full faces than the others do, and draw teachers and friends all facing the same direction. On the other hand, the negative group show abuse and emphasize on teachers' eyes or sometimes omit them, including the picture of self in stiff posture looking at nobody. 2. After judgment analysis to verify how good the KSD test reads the degrees of perception as to self, teachers, and friends, a significant outcome was shown in the perception of only teachers and friends. This study, as a diagnostic instrument. shows some significance by virtue of the fact that the validity of KSD is thus verified. That is, KSD proves to be a valid test method in grasping the impotance of children's perception of teachers and friends. However, it is relatively difficult for children to perceive self. Thus, it could be recommended, with regard to children's perception of self, to seek a better standard or test fitting for each age group, so as to complement KSD when there is a need to judge clearer children's perceptual characteristics. Keywords: self, school drawing, f riends, kinetic - 1234 -