2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.aip.2011.02.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Standardizing the Formal Elements Art Therapy Scale (FEATS) rotation scale with computerized technology: A pilot study

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…When using a stepwise regression model, multiple art treatment methods can be compared, among which PPAT is the best treatment method for patients with dementia [ 183 ]. In addition, the use of PPAT for evaluation also prove that human–machine evaluation tools may be more accurate than human perception [ 184 ]. A computer AT system for kinetic family drawing can bring objective and accurate evaluation for the evaluation of AT [ 185 ].…”
Section: Results Of the Qualitative Analysis Of At-aided Health And Well-beingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…When using a stepwise regression model, multiple art treatment methods can be compared, among which PPAT is the best treatment method for patients with dementia [ 183 ]. In addition, the use of PPAT for evaluation also prove that human–machine evaluation tools may be more accurate than human perception [ 184 ]. A computer AT system for kinetic family drawing can bring objective and accurate evaluation for the evaluation of AT [ 185 ].…”
Section: Results Of the Qualitative Analysis Of At-aided Health And Well-beingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For the overall test, results can be interpreted as strong consistency among raters. Especially compared to the few existing studies on inter-rater reliability in art therapy assessment (Eitel et al, 2008;Mattson, 2011), results are substantial.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, their main construct of interest is creativity of a product or a person, not the product itself with regard to its pictorial expression. Other approaches use digital technology to objectify image analysis, for example in terms of computerized assessment of art-based instruments (Mattson, 2010), combining existing measures with public domain image analysis software (Mattson, 2009(Mattson, , 2011, computer-based systems rating basic color-related aspects (Kim et al, 2007) or using computational network science for assessing global image properties (Hayn-Leichsenring et al, 2020).…”
Section: Measuring Instrumentsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For the overall test, results can be interpreted as strong consistency among raters. Especially compared to the few existing studies on inter-rater reliability in art therapy assessment (Eitel, Szkura, Pokorny, & von Wietersheim, 2008;Mattson, 2011), results are substantial.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Other approaches use digital technology to objectify image analysis, for example in terms of computerized assessment of art-based instruments (Mattson, 2010), combining existing measures with public domain image analysis software (Mattson, 2009(Mattson, , 2011, computer-based systems rating basic color-related aspects (Kim, Bae, & Lee, 2007) or using computational network science for assessing global image properties (Hayn-Leichsenring, Kenett, Schulz, & Chatterjee, 2020) A tool that shares a similar approach with this work, is the Assessment of Art Attributes (Chatterjee, Widick, Sternschein, Smith, & Bromberger, 2010;Penn Center for Neuroaesthetics, 2019) although it stems from a neuropsychological perspective. By connecting art and science it aims to quantify artworks including to both, formal-perceptional and content-representational attributes.…”
Section: Measuring Instrumentsmentioning
confidence: 99%