The present study was designed to investigate the impact of familiarity and audience age on children’s self-presentation in self-drawings of happy, sad and neutral figures. Two hundred children (100 girls and 100 boys) with the average age of 8 years 2 months, ranging from 6 years 3 months to 10 years 1 month, formed two age groups and five conditions (n = 20). All children completed two counterbalanced sessions. Session 1 consisted of drawing a neutral figure followed by a sad and happy figure in counterbalanced order. The drawing instructions specified the age of the audience (adult vs. child) and familiarity (familiar vs. unfamiliar) differently for each condition. Measures of colour preference were taken in session 2. Certain drawing strategies, such as waving and smiling, varied as a function of audience age and familiarity whilst others, such as colour use, did not. The results are discussed in terms of cue dependency and framework theories of children’s drawings and the need to be aware of specific characteristics of who children are drawing for.
Aloise-YoungP. (1993). The development of self-presentation: Self-promotion in 6 to 10 year old children. Social Cognition, 11, 201–222.
2.
AlschulerR.HattwickL. A. (1947). Painting and personality. Volumes I and II. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
3.
AnastasiA.FoleyJ. P. (1941). A survey of the literature on artistic behaviour in the abnormal: IV experimental investigations. Journal of General Psychology, 187–237.
4.
AronssonK.AnderssonS. (1996). Social scaling in children’s drawings of classroom life: A cultural comparative analysis of children’s drawings in Africa and Sweden. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 14, 301–314.
5.
BanerjeeR. (2002). Audience effects on self-presentation in childhood. Social Development, 11, 487–506.
6.
BanerjeeR.LinternV. (2000). Boys will be boys: The effect of social evaluation concerns on gender typing. Social Development, 9, 397–408.
7.
BanerjeeR.YuillN. (1999a). Children’s explanations for self-presentational behaviour. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 105–111.
8.
BanerjeeR.YuillN. (1999b). Children’s understanding of self-presentational display rules: Associations with mental-state understanding. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 17, 111–124.
9.
BarrettM. D.BeaumontA.JennettM. (1985). Some children do sometimes do what they have been told to do: Task demands and verbal instructions in children’s drawings. In FreemanN. H.CoxM. V. (Eds.), Visual order: The nature and development of pictorial representation (pp. 176–187). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
10.
BrechetC.BaldyR.PicardD. (2009). How does Sam feel? Children’s labelling and drawing of basic emotions. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 27, 587–606.
11.
BoyatzisC. J.VargheseR. (1994). Children’s emotional associations with colors. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 155, 77–85.
12.
BurkittE. (2008). Children’s choice of color to depict metaphorical and affective information. In MillbraithC.TrautnerH. M. (Eds.), Children’s understanding and production of pictures, drawings and art: Theoretical and empirical approaches (pp. 107–120). London, UK: Hogrefe & Huber Publisher.
13.
BurkittE.BarnettN. (2006). The impact of brief and elaborate mood induction on drawing size: A question of approach?Educational Psychology, 26, 93–108.
14.
BurkittE.BarrettM. (2010). Children’s graphic flexibility: A response to representational redescription, Journal of Creative Behavior, 44, 169–190.
15.
BurkittE.BarrettM.DavisA. (2003a). The effect of affective characterisations on the use of colour within children’s drawings. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 44, 445–455.
16.
BurkittE.BarrettM.DavisA. (2003b). The effect of affective characterisations on the size of children’s drawings. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 21, 565–584.
17.
BurkittE.BarrettM.DavisA. (2004). The effect of affective characterisations on the use of size and colour in drawings produced by children in the absence of a model. Educational Psychology, 24, 315–343.
18.
BurkittE.BarrettM.DavisA. (2009). Effects of different emotion terms on the size and colour of children’s drawings. International Journal of Art Therapy: Formerly Inscape, 14, 1745–4840.
19.
BurkittE.TalaK.LowJ. (2007). Finnish and English children’s color use to depict affectively characterised figures. International Journal of Behavioural Development, 31, 59–64.
20.
BurkittE.WatlingD.MurrayL. (2011). Children’s drawings of significant figures for a peer or an adult audience. Infant and Child Development, 20, 466–473.
21.
CamparoL. B.WagnerJ. T.SaywitzK. J. (2001). Interviewing children about real and fictitious events: Revisiting the narrative elaboration procedure [Special issue]. Law and Human Behavior, 25, 63–80.
22.
CallaghanT. C. (1999). Early understanding and production of graphic symbols. Child Development, 70, 1314–1324.
23.
CleeveH.BradburyR. J. (1992, September). Children’s productions and judgements of drawings of people of different importance. Poster presented at the 5th European Conference of Developmental Psychology, Seville.
24.
CraddickR. (1961). Size of Santa Claus drawings as a function of time before and after Christmas. Journal of Psychological Studies, 12, 121–125.
25.
CraddickR. (1963). Size of Hallowe’en witch drawings prior to, on and after Hallowe’en. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 16, 235–238.
26.
ComptonW. (2005). An introduction to positive psychology. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
27.
CoxM. V. (1992). Children’s drawings. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin.
28.
CoxM. V. (1993). Children’s drawings of the human figure. Hove, UK: Lawrence Earlbaum.
29.
CoxM. V. (2005). The pictorial world of the child. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
30.
DalleyT. (1984). Art as therapy. London, UK: Tavistock Publications.
31.
DavisA. M. (1985a). Conflict between canonicality and array-specificity in young children’s drawings. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 3, 363–372.
32.
DavisA. M. (1985b). The canonical bias: Young children’s drawings of familiar objects. In FreemanN. H.CoxM. V. (Eds.), Visual order: The nature and development of pictorial representation (pp. 202–213). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
33.
DienerE.DienerR. B. (2008). Happiness: Unlocking the mysteries of psychological wealth. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
34.
FaulF.ErdfelderE. (1992). GPOWER: A priori, post-hoc, and compromise power analyses for MS-DOS [Computer program]. Bonn, Germany: Bonn University, Department of Psychology.
35.
FoxT.ThomasG. V. (1990). Children’s drawings of an anxiety-eliciting topic: Effect on size of the drawing. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 29, 71–81.
36.
FreemanN. H. (1977). How children try to plan drawings. In ButterworthG. (Ed.), The child’s representation of the world (pp. 3–29). New York, NY: Plenum Press.
37.
FreemanN. H. (1980). Strategies of representation in young children: Analysis of spatial skills and drawing processes. London, UK: Academic Press.
38.
FreemanN. H. (1995). The emergence of a framework theory of pictorial reasoning. In Lange-KuttnerC. (Ed.), Drawing and looking: Theoretical approaches to pictorial representation in children (pp. 135–146). Hemel Hempstead, UK: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
39.
FuG.LeeK. (2007). Social grooming in the kindergarten: The emergence of flattery behaviour. Developmental Science, 10, 255–265.
40.
GoodenoughF. L. (1926). The measurement of intelligence by drawings. New York, NY: World Books.
41.
GolombC. (1992). The child’s creation of a pictorial world. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
42.
GreenleesI. A.LeylandA.ThelwellR. C.FilbyW. (2008). The influence of soccer penalty takers’ uniform colour and pre-penalty kick gaze on the impression formed of them by goalkeepers. Journal of Sports Sciences, 26, 569–576.
43.
HammerE. F. (1958). The clinical application of projective drawings. Springfield, IL: C. C. Thomas.
44.
HammerE. F. (1997). Advances in projective drawing interpretation. Springfield, IL: C. C. Thomas.
45.
HammondS. M. (1988). CORRES 1.0: A programme for the correspondence analysis of contingency tables on IBM compatible micros. Guildford, UK: Department of Psychology, University of Surrey.
46.
HammondS. M. (1993). The descriptive analyses of shared representations. In BreakwellG.CanterD. (Eds.), Empirical approaches to social representation (pp. 205–220). Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.
47.
HarrisP. (1989). Children and emotion: Development of psychological understanding. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
48.
HarrisP. L. (1994). The child’s understanding of emotion: Developmental change and the family environment. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 35, 3–28.
49.
HarrisP. L. (2000). Understanding emotion. In LewisM.Haviland-JonesJ. (Eds.), Handbook of emotions (pp. 281–292). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
50.
HuguetP.RégnierI. (2007). Stereotype threat among schoolgirls in quasi-ordinary classroom circumstances. Journal of Educational Psychololgy, 99, 545–560.
51.
HunsleyJ.LeeC. M.WoodJ. M. (2003). Controversial and questionable assessment techniques. In LilienfeldS. O.LynnS. J.LohrJ. M. (Eds.), Science and pseudoscience in clinical psychology (pp. 39–76). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
52.
JolleyR. (2010). Children and pictures: Drawing and understanding. Chicheseter, UK: Wiley Blackwell.
53.
KoppitzE. M. (1966). Emotional indicators on human figure drawings of shy and aggressive children. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 22, 466–469.
54.
KoppitzE. M. (1968). Psychological evaluation of children’s human figure drawings. London, UK: Grune and Stratton.
55.
KrippendorffK. (2004). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (2nd ed.). London, UK: Sage.
56.
LearyM. R.NezlekJ. B.DownsD.Radford-DavenportJ.MartinJ.McMullenA. (1994). Self-presentation in everyday interactions: Effects of target familiarity and gender composition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 664–673.
LewisV.KelletM.RobinsonC.FraserS.DingS. (2004). The reality of research with children and young people. London, UK: Sage/The Open University.
59.
LightP. H.McEwanF. (1987). Drawings as messages: The effect of a communication game upon production of view-specific drawings. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 5, 53–60.
60.
LightP. H.SimmonsB. (1983). The effects of a communication task upon the representation of depth relationships in young children’s drawings. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 35, 81–92.
61.
MachoverK. (1949). Personality projection in the drawings of the human figure. Springfield, IL: C. C. Thomas.
McNiffS. (1992). Art as medicine: Creating a therapy of the imagination. London, UK: Piakus.
64.
MelkmanR.KoriatA.PardoK. (1976). Preference for colour and form in pre-schoolers as related to colour and form differentiation. Child Development, 47, 1045–1050.
65.
MisailidiP.BonotiF. (2008). Emotion in children’s art: Do young children understand the emotions expressed in other children’s drawings?Journal of Early Childhood Research, 6, 189–200.
66.
MorrisA. S.SilkJ. S.SteinbergL.MyersS. S.RobinsonL. R. (2007). The role of the family context in the development of emotion regulation. Social Development, 16, 361–388.
67.
NelsonT. M.AllanD. K.NelsonJ. (1971). Cultural differences in the use of color in northwest Canada. International Journal of Psychology, 6, 283–292.
68.
O’HareD.CookD. (1983). Children’s sensitivity to different modes of colour use in art. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 53, 267–277.
69.
ParkerJ.GottmanJ. (1989). Social and emotional development in a relational context: Friendship interaction from early childhood to adolescence. In BerndtT.LaddG. (Eds.), Peer relationships in child development (pp. 95–131). New York, NY: Wiley.
70.
ParsonsM. J. (1987). How we understand art: A cognitive developmental account of aesthetic experience. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
71.
PranckevicieneA.Zardecktaite-MatulaitieneK.SoikinaiteI. (2009). Children’s color preferences and color choices for completing drawings of human feelings in primary school, Psichologija, 39, 31–44.
72.
SilverR. A. (1996). Silver drawing test of cognition and emotion. Sarasota, FL: Ablin Press.
73.
SittonR.LightP. (1992). Drawing to differentiate: Flexibility in young children’s human figure drawings. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 10, 25–33.
74.
SolleyC. M.HaighG. (1957). A note to Santa Claus. Topeka Research Papers. The Menninger Foundation, 18, 4–5.
75.
StefanatouA.BowlerD. (1999). Depiction of pain in the self-drawings of children with sickle cell disease. Child Care, Health and Development, 23, 135–155.
76.
ThomasG.ChaigneE.FoxT. (1989). Children’s drawings of topics differing in significance: Effects on size of drawing. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 7, 321–331.
77.
TiceD. M.ButlerJ. L.MuravenM. B.StillwellA. M. (1995). When modesty prevails: Differential favorability of self-presentation to friends and strangers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 1120–1138.
78.
WatlingD.BanerjeeR. (2007a). Children’s differentiation between ingratiation and self-promotion. Social Development, 16, 758–776,
79.
WatlingD.BanerjeeR. (2007b). Children’s understanding of modesty in front of peer and adult audiences. Infant and Child Development, 16, 227–236.
80.
WatlingD.BanerjeeR. (2012). Children’s understanding of disclaimers. Social Cognition, 30, 18–36.
81.
YoshidaT.KojoK.KakuH. (1982). A study on the development of self-presentation in children. Japanese Journal of Educational Psychology, 30, 120–127.
82.
ZemanJ.GarberJ. (1996). Display rules for anger, sadness, and pain: It depends on who is watching. Child Development, 67, 957–973.
83.
ZentnerM. R. (2001). Preferences for colours and colour-emotion combinations in early childhood. Developmental Science, 4, 389–398.
