Evaluation of the Pictures Drawn by Adults for 'Non-Existent Animal' Test by Gender

"Non-existent Animal" test, which is projective in nature, has been used as an individual recognition technique in many countries, especially in Russia. There are a number of important differences that distinguish "Non-existent Animal" Test from other similar tests. The most impo...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inEuropean journal of educational research Vol. 9; no. 3; pp. 1115 - 1125
Main Author Halmatov, Sultanberk
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Eurasian Society of Educational Research Association 15.07.2020
Subjects
Anatomy
Animals
College Students
Creativity
Foreign Countries
Freehand Drawing
Gender Differences
Imagination
Individual Characteristics
Projective Measures
Psychological Patterns
Turkey
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:"Non-existent Animal" test, which is projective in nature, has been used as an individual recognition technique in many countries, especially in Russia. There are a number of important differences that distinguish "Non-existent Animal" Test from other similar tests. The most important one is that the "thing" to be drawn is something that does not exist. Drawing something that does not exist is different from drawing something that exists. S/he could be more cooperative due to lack of anxiety for not being able to make the picture similar to anything. Another difference is that it is not restrictive. In this study, pictures drawn by 154 university students for the "Non-existent Animal" projective test were examined. The pictures drawn by the participants were evaluated by the researcher in light of some keys of the Non-existent Animal Test. These keys were determined as; the originality of the drawn picture; the general status of the lines; the status of the drawn animal's organs such as head, eyes, ears, feet, arms, wings, thorns, antennae; and the animal's way of life. Results showed that the pictures drawn by the males and females were different from each other in many aspects.
ISSN:2165-8714
2165-8714
DOI:10.12973/EU-JER.9.3.1115