Encyclopedia of Clinical Neuropsychology

2018 Edition
| Editors: Jeffrey S. Kreutzer, John DeLuca, Bruce Caplan

House-Tree-Person Test

  • Robert M. GordonEmail author
  • Alexandra Rudd-Barnard
  • Lucia Smith-Wexler
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57111-9_2029

Synonyms

H-T-P Test

Description

The House-Tree-Person (H-T-P) technique, developed by John Buck (1948) and Emmanuel Hammer (1958), is one of the most widely used projective tests for children and adults. It can be used with individuals aged 3 years and older and is almost entirely unstructured; the client is simply instructed to make a freehand drawing of a house, a tree, and a person. Analysis of the H-T-P is a two-phased, four-step process. In phase one, the first step in testing is nonverbal and almost entirely unstructured; the medium of expression is the freehand, pencil drawings of a house, tree, and person (Buck 1966). The second step is verbal, apperceptive, and more formally structured. In it, the client is given the opportunity to describe, define, and interpret his or her drawn objects and their respective environment, and to respond to various open-ended questions. In phase two, the first step again involves the freehand drawing of a house, tree, and person, but with...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References and Readings

  1. Arrington, D., & Yorgin, P. D. (2001). Art therapy as a cross-cultural means to assess psychosocial health in homeless and orphaned children in Kiev. Art Therapy: Journal of the American Art Therapy Association, 18, 80–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bennink, J., Gussak, D. E., & Skowran, M. (2003). The role of the art therapist in a juvenile setting. The Arts in Psychotherapy, 30, 163–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Blatt, S., & Ford, R. (1994). Therapeutic change. New York: Plenum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Buck, J. N. (1948). The H-T-P. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 4, 151–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Buck, J. N. (1966). The House-Tree-Person technique: Revised manual. Beverly Hills: Western Psychological Services.Google Scholar
  6. Buck, J. N. (1978). A qualitative and quantitative scoring manual. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 4, 397–405.Google Scholar
  7. Buck, J. N., & Hammer, E. F. (Eds.). (1969). Advances in House-Tree-Person techniques: Variations and applications. Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services.Google Scholar
  8. Burns, R. C. (1987). Kinetic-House-Tree-Person Drawings (K-H-T-P): An Interpretative Manual. Philadelphia: Brunner/Mazel.Google Scholar
  9. Daiki, K., & Mikie, S. (2015). Relationships between human figures drawn by Japanese early adolescents: Applying the Synthetic House-Tree-Person Test. Social Behavior and Personality, 43, 175–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dewaraja, R., Sato, H., & Ogawa, T. (2006). Anxiety in tsunami-affected children in Sri Lanka measured by Revised Children’s Manifest Anxiety Scale and Synthetic House-Tree-Person Test. International Congress Series, 1287, 74–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gantt, L. (2004). The case for formal art therapy assessments. Art Therapy: Journal of the American Art Therapy Association, 21, 18–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Garb, H. N., Wood, J. M., Lilienfeld, S. O., & Nezworski, M. T. (2002). Effective use of projective techniques in clinical practice: Let the data help with selection and interpretation. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 5, 454–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gauntlett, D., & Holzwarth, P. (2006). Creative and visual methods for exploring identities. Visual Studies, 21, 82–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Goodenough, F. L. (1926). Measurement of intelligence by drawings. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World.Google Scholar
  15. Groth-Marnat, G., & Roberts, L. (1998). Human Figure Drawings and House Tree Person drawings as indicators of self-esteem: A quantitative approach. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 54, 219–222.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hammer, E. F. (1958). The clinical application of projective drawings. Springfield: Charles Thomas.Google Scholar
  17. Hammer, E. F. (1971). The clinical application of projective drawings. Springfield: Charles C. Thomas.Google Scholar
  18. Hammer, E. F. (1997). Advances in projective drawing interpretation. Springfield: Charles C. Thomas.Google Scholar
  19. Handler, L. (1996). The clinical issues of figure drawings. In C. S. Newmark (Ed.), Major psychological assessment instruments (2nd ed., pp. 206–293). Allyn & Needham Heights: Bacon.Google Scholar
  20. Handler, L., & Riethmiller, R. J. (1998). Teaching and learning the administration and interpretation of graphic techniques. In H. Handler & M. Hilsenroth (Eds.), Teaching and Learning Personality Assessment (pp. 267–294). Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  21. Harris, D. B. (1963). Children’s drawings as measures of intellectual maturity. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World.Google Scholar
  22. Jolles, I. A. (1964). Catalogue for the qualitative interpretation of the House-Tree-Person (H-T-P). Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services.Google Scholar
  23. Kato, D. & Suzuki, M. (2015). Relationships between human figures drawn by Japanese early adolescents: Applying the Synthetic House-Tree-Person Test. Social Behavior and Personality, 43, 175–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Koppitz, E. M. (1968). Psychological evaluation of children’s Human Figure Drawings. New York: Grune & Stratton.Google Scholar
  25. Leibowitz, M. (1999). Interpreting Projective Drawings. New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  26. Li, C., Chen, T., Helfrich, C., & Pan, A. (2011). The development of a scoring system for the kinetic house-tree-person drawing test. Hong Kong Journal of Occupational Therapy, 21, 72–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lopez, J. R., & Carolan, R. (2001). House-Tree-Person drawings and sex offenders: A pilot study. Art Therapy: Journal of the American Art Therapy Association, 18, 158–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Louw, A. E., & Ramkisson, S. (2002). The suitability of the Roberts Apperception Test for Children (RATC), the House-Tree-Person (H-T-P) and Draw-A-Person (D-A-P) scales in the identification of child sexual abuse in the Indian community: An exploratory study. Southern African Journal of Child and Adolescent Mental Health, 14, 91–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Machover, K. (1949). Personality projection in the drawing of the human figure. Springfield: Charles C. Thomas.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Malchiodi, C. (1998). Understanding Children’s Drawings. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  31. McNeilly, G., & Gilroy, A. (Eds.). (2000). The changing shape of art therapy: New developments in theory and practice. London: Jessica Kingsley.Google Scholar
  32. Mikami, N. (1995). The S-HTP Technique: The Clinical and Developmental Approach in Synthetic-H–T–P Test. Tokyo: Seishinshobo.Google Scholar
  33. Palmer, L., Farrar, A. R., Valle, M., Ghahary, N., et al. (2000). An investigation of the clinical use of the House-Tree-Person projective drawings in the psychological evaluation of child sexual abuse. Child Maltreatment, 5, 169–175.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Pelander, T., Lehtonen, K., & Leino-Kilpi, H. (2007). Children in the hospital: Elements of quality in drawings. Journal of Pediatric Nursing, 22, 333–341.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Picard, D., & Lebaz, S. (2010). Symbolic use of size and color in freehand drawing of the tree: Myth or reality. Journal of Personality Assessment, 92, 186–188.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Safran, D. S. (2002). Art therapy and AD/HD: Diagnostic and therapeutic approaches. London: Jessica Kingsley.Google Scholar
  37. Sattler, J. M. (1988). Assessment of children (3rd ed.). San Diego: Jerome M. Sattler.Google Scholar
  38. Sherman, R., & Fredman, N. (1987). Handbook of measurements for marriage and family therapy. Philadelphia: Routledge.Google Scholar
  39. Silver, R. (1996). Silver drawing test of cognition and emotion. Sarasota: Ablin.Google Scholar
  40. Tharinger, D., & Stark, K. (1990). A qualitative versus quantitative approach to evaluating a Draw-A-Person and Kinetic Family Drawing: Study of mood- and anxiety-disordered children. Psychological Assessment: Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 2, 365–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Van Hutton, V. (1994). House-Tree-Person and Draw-a-Person as measures of abuse in children: A quantitative scoring system. Odessa: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
  42. Vass, Z. (1998). The inner formal structure of the H-T-P drawings: An exploratory study. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 54, 611–619.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. West, M. M. (1998). Meta-analysis of studies assessing the efficacy of projective techniques in discriminating child sexual abuse. Child Abuse and Neglect, 22, 1151–1166.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. White, C. R., Wallace, J., & Huffman, L. C. (2004). Use of drawings to identify thought impairment among students with emotional and behavioral disorders: An exploratory study. Art Therapy: Journal of the American Art Therapy Association, 21, 210–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Yama, M. (1990). The usefulness of human figure drawings as an index of overall adjustment. Journal of Projective Techniques, 12, 202–215.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG (outside the USA) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robert M. Gordon
    • 1
    Email author
  • Alexandra Rudd-Barnard
    • 2
  • Lucia Smith-Wexler
    • 3
  1. 1.Rusk RehabilitationNew York University Langone Medical CenterNew YorkUSA
  2. 2.One NeuroWest Los AngelesUSA
  3. 3.Rusk Rehabilitation, New York University Langone HealthNew YorkUSA