| Translated abstract: |
| Abstract | Language |
|---|
| In this study the relation between the norms and values of a culture and the human figure drawings of children, who live in it, is explored. For this purpose the findings of two disciplines are combined, namely of the "Cross-Cultural Psychology" (Triandes, 1995; Markus & Kitayam, 1991, 2001) and of the research of children's drawings. According to this line of research the children's drawing is understood as a symbolic representation, which express the psychological meaning of the body and its parts (Abraham, 1978). In this context, it is assumed that symbols are "culturalistic" (Knobloch, 2001; Lange, 2001; Cassirer, 1996) and convey meanings that depend on the values and norms of a culture. These meanings are expressed in children`s drawings threw the mechanism of projection (Hammer, 1958; Schetty, 1974). During the research history of children's drawings a significant attention were given to the "deviations" (Rimerman, 1995, "errors", Winner, 2006) between the graphical representations of singular configurations and of the space in children's drawing and the perceived reality. Similar become the human figure drawing by children a special research interest (see Cox, 1993; Schönmackers, 1996;-Lokai Koeppe, 1996). In explaining the deviations between the human figure drawing and the realistic appearance of the human figure there were three main approaches established, namely a cognitive (Luquet, 1913, 1927, Goodenough, 1926, Piaget & Inhelder, 1996; Harris, 1963; Freeman, 1972; 1980, 1987, Thomas & Tsalimi, 1988), a clinical (Machover, 1949; Hammer, 1958; Koppitz, 1968; Schetty, 1974, Abraham, 1978; Naglieri et al, 1991) and an artistic (and culture-specific, Arnheim, 1956 , 1978; Winner, 1989, 2006; Golomb, 1992; Willats, 1977, 2008; Wilson & Wilson, 1977, 1981; see Richter, 2001), which represent different hypotheses. After outlining the main thesis of these three approaches and the main differences in the norms and values of "individualistic" (Palestinian) and "collectivistic" (German) cultures, cross cultural studies of children's drawings were reinterpreted under cross cultural psychological perspective (Thomas, 2003; Dwairy, 2007, Hofstede, 1980, Hofstede & Hofstede, 2006; Markus & Kitayama, 1991, 2001; Triandes, 1989, 1995; Triandes et al 1985, 1988, 2001; Grossmann, 2003). A special attention become those studies, which refer the values in their explanation of the differences (deviations) between the human figure drawings of children from different cultures (Koppitz & Moreau, 1968; Koppitz & Casullo, 1983, Andersson 1995, Andersson & Aronsson , 1996; Aronsson & Young, 2001; Teichmann & Zafrir, 2003; Unger-Heitsch, 2001, Al-Krenawi & Slater, 2007). The results of this study on the human figure drawings of 46 nine years old Palestinian children from Israel and German children with the same age show that the Arab children draw face details significantly more than German children. However, it was found that the average size of the head in the two cultural groups is identical. This difference was attributed to the supported social orientation (face and its parts) in the collectivistic Palestinian culture. In the representation of the arms, hands and fingers Arab children draw to significantly more than German children unrealistic and deviated representations. Particularly striking are the unrealistic connections of arms to the trunk, which however were not observed in the connection of the "neck with the trunk" and in the connection of the "legs to the trunk". This Phenomenon corresponds to the supported interdependence of individuals in the Arab culture. The most conspicuous deviation in the human figure drawings of the Palestinian children is the square unrealistic representation of the trunk. Arab children draw significantly more than German children unrealistic trunks, which are as wide as long, or wider than longer. At the same time most Arab children do not draw pelvic area. In summary, it is claimed that this square unrealistic representation of the trunk caused by the omission of the pelvic area, why the author describes them as "cut-off" trunks. In these two features is apparent that the deviated representations of the trunk and of the pelvic area correspond to the strongly suppressed sexual meanings in the Palestinian Arab culture. This kind of representation of the "cut off" trunks was also found in previous studies with Arab children. | English |
|
![[img]](https://kups.ub.uni-koeln.de/style/images/fileicons/application_pdf.png)
