The Draw-a-Person Test as well as the Wellesley Role Orientation Scale were administered to 150 college women. A significantly greater proportion of the traditional women drew opposite-sex figures than the proportion of non-traditional women. A follow-up study sampled married women who were NOW members and a random sample of married non-members. No NOW member drew a male while 26% of non-members did. Data from both samples were consistent with one another and were explained in terms of acceptance of traditional-societal values as a factor in determining sex of the figure drawn.
References
1.
AlperT. G.The relationship between role orientation and achievement motivation in college women. Journal of Personality, 1973, 41, 9–31.
2.
BrovbrmanI. K.BrovermanD. M.ClarksonF. E.RosenkrantzP. S., & VogelS. R.Sex-role stereotypes and clinical judgments of mental health. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1970, 34, 1–7.
3.
DeauxK., & EmswillerT.Explanations of successful performance on sex-linked tasks: What is skill for the male is luck for the female. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1974, 29, 80–85.
4.
DennisW.Group values through children's drawings. New York: Wiley, 1966.
5.
HeinrichP., & TriebleJ. K.Sex preferences in children's human figure drawings. Journal of Personality Assessment, 1972, 36, 263–267.
6.
LevinsonD. J., & HuffmanP. E.Traditional family ideology. Journal of Personality, 1955, 23, 251–273.
7.
MachoverK.Personality projection in the drawing of the human figure. Springfield, IL: Thomas, 1949.
8.
RobackH. B.Human figure drawings: Their utility in the clinical psychologists' armamentarium for personality assessment. Psychological Bulletin, 1968, 70, 1–19.
9.
SwensenC. H.Empirical evaluations of human figure drawings. Psychological Bulletin, 1968, 70, 20–44.
10.
TouheyJ. C.Effect of additional women professionals on ratings of occupational prestige and desirability. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1974, 29, 86–89.
