2016
DOI: 10.1111/cdev.12520
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Preschool Drawing and School Mathematics: The Nature of the Association

Abstract: The study examined the aetiology of individual differences in early drawing and of its longitudinal association with school mathematics. Participants (N = 14,760), members of the Twins Early Development Study, were assessed on their ability to draw a human figure, including number of features, symmetry and proportionality. Human figure drawing was moderately stable across six months (average r = .40). Individual differences in drawing at age 4½ were influenced by genetic (.21), shared environmental (.30) and n… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
11
1

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
1
1

Relationship

2
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 54 publications
1
11
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The measures for human figure drawing and general cognitive ability were collected at two different assessment waves at ages 4 and 9. In the present study, the raw mean for human figure drawing was slightly higher (M = 7.27, SD = 2.42) in comparison with the means obtained from the larger sample (N = 14,580, M = 6.81, SD = 2.88; Malanchini et al, 2016). Also, the standardised mean for general cognitive ability was slightly higher (M = .10, SD = .92) than the average intelligence found for the entire TEDS sample, which more closely resembles that of the general population and shows a standard deviation of 3.5.…”
Section: 2measurescontrasting
confidence: 87%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…The measures for human figure drawing and general cognitive ability were collected at two different assessment waves at ages 4 and 9. In the present study, the raw mean for human figure drawing was slightly higher (M = 7.27, SD = 2.42) in comparison with the means obtained from the larger sample (N = 14,580, M = 6.81, SD = 2.88; Malanchini et al, 2016). Also, the standardised mean for general cognitive ability was slightly higher (M = .10, SD = .92) than the average intelligence found for the entire TEDS sample, which more closely resembles that of the general population and shows a standard deviation of 3.5.…”
Section: 2measurescontrasting
confidence: 87%
“…Brooks, 2009;Malchiodi, 1998;Wright, 2010). These results cast a new light on the use of human figure drawing ability tests that extends beyond their traditional use as an index for cognitive development (Arden et al, 2014;Goodenough, 1926;Harris, 1963;Malanchini et al, 2016;McCarthy, 1972). Applying the CAT procedure to young children's human figure drawings may also capture a wider range of relevant processes that are associated with creativity throughout childhood.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 95%
See 3 more Smart Citations