|کد مقاله||کد نشریه||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||نسخه تمام متن|
|343561||617185||2015||9 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||دانلود رایگان|
• Associations between family drawings, hope, and attributional style were examined.
• The places of vitality, pride, emotional distance, anger, and pathology were appeared.
• Differences in children's hope and negative style were found based on their attachment.
• Differences in mothers’ negative style were found based on children's attachment.
The current study examined differences in children's and parents’ hope and negative attributional style as a function of children's attachment categorizations derived from children's family drawings in 77 triads of young elementary school age children ( mean age 6.70, range 6–7.5; SD = 53), mothers, and fathers in Israel. In addition, associations between scales in children's family drawings and children's and parents’ hope and negative attributional style were examined. Drawings were coded using Main and Kaplan's (1986) coding system. Both children's and parents’ hopes and attributional style were reflected in the children's drawings. Specifically, the scales reflecting attachment security, such as vitality and pride, were positively correlated with children's hopes and negatively correlated with children's and parents’ negative attributional style. By contrast, the scales reflecting attachment insecurity, such as emotional distance, anger, and pathology, were negatively correlated with participants’ positive attributional style and hope and positively correlated with negative attributional style. Surprisingly, role reversal was positively correlated with mothers’ hope and negatively with fathers’ negative attributional style. Finally, differences in children's hope and negative attributional style, in addition to mothers’ negative attributional style, were found as a function of children's attachment categorizations. The implications for theory and clinical interventions are discussed.
Journal: The Arts in Psychotherapy - Volume 43, April 2015, Pages 7–15